bulk_move_issues

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare destructiveHint=false, but the description says Components, versions and projects are 'cleared by default' — irreversible data loss — and the schema's confirm parameter is itself labeled 'this destructive/bulk operation.' The description's disclosure of data-clearing directly conflicts with the non-destructive annotation, which triggers the Annotation Contradiction rule.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the most consequential caveat (default field clearing). Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a bulk mutation with 4 documented params but no output schema, the description covers the core action and the key side effect. It omits the confirm requirement, notification behavior, and routing to sibling tools, leaving gaps an agent must close from the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% (queue key, issues list-or-filter syntax with 10000 limit, notify, confirm are all documented in the schema). The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 for fully-covered schemas applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Bulk move issues to another queue'), and the 'Bulk' qualifier distinguishes it from the single-issue move_issue. It does not, however, name or contrast with the closest siblings (move_issue, bulk_update_issues, bulk_transition_issues), so an agent still has to infer the boundary.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites. It never mentions that confirm=true is required to execute, nor when to prefer this over move_issue or bulk_transition_issues. The clearing statement is behavioral context, not usage guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.