Get bounded subtree wake and blocker diagnostics for an issue

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

The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and authorization class ('board_or_agent'), which supplements the annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint). The description is consistent with annotations and provides moderate behavioral context, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as rate limits or data volume.

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 succinct, comprising two sentences with the purpose and HTTP details. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, but the second line could be integrated for better readability. Overall, it is efficient with no superfluous text.

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?

Given the complexity of the tool (nested parameter, output schema present), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'bounded subtree' means, how diagnostics are structured, or how this tool relates to siblings. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the usage context and parameter details are lacking.

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?

The input schema includes a required nested 'path' object with an 'id' string property, but the description provides no explanation of the parameter. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to add any meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent without guidance on how to construct the path.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'bounded subtree wake and blocker diagnostics for an issue.' The verb 'Get' and resource 'diagnostics' are specific, and the combination of 'wake and blocker' with 'subtree' distinguishes it from sibling tools like pc_get_issues_by_id_diagnostics_blockers and pc_get_issues_by_id_diagnostics_wakes, which handle individual diagnostics.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not indicate that this tool returns diagnostics for the entire subtree, while sibling tools might return direct diagnostics, leaving the agent to infer usage context without explicit when-not or alternative recommendations.

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