find_issue_reports

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation safe and non-destructive, so the description need not repeat that. It adds only the supported filter keys, which is useful context but does not describe pagination, result format, or authorization requirements beyond the annotation.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action, resource, and one detail of filtering.

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 tool with five parameters, a nested filter object, and low schema description coverage, the one-sentence description is insufficient. It omits how pagination, ordering, and the nested filter object behave, leaving an agent to guess about defaults and result structure.

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 only 20%, so the description should compensate, but it only repeats the filter keys already documented in the schema. The other four parameters (page, perPage, orderBy, orderAsc) receive no explanation in either the schema or the description.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('saved issue reports'), and the parenthetical clarifies the supported filter keys. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling 'create_issue_report' by the search action and 'saved' qualifier.

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?

Usage is implied by 'Search saved issue reports', but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'find_issues' or 'create_issue_report'. No exclusions or prerequisite conditions are mentioned.

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