search_stories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, non-destructive read operation. The description adds that the query is 'wrapped in JQL' and returns a specific set of fields, providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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 two sentences: first defines the core action, second gives a use case and return format. It is front-loaded, no redundant words, and every sentence adds value. Perfectly concise for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema (but description specifies return format), and annotations cover safety/open world, the description is fairly complete. It includes purpose, usage hint, and return structure. Missing details like pagination or error behavior, but acceptable for a simple search tool.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters (query, max_results, project_key). The description mentions the query as 'plain-text query' but does not add meaningful extra semantics beyond the schema. The return format hint helps slightly, but overall parameter info is adequately covered by schema.

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 action ('Searches for Stories'), the resource ('Stories in the configured project'), and the input ('plain-text query wrapped in JQL'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_story' (single retrieval) and 'list_*' tools by specifying a text-based search.

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 explicitly states a use case: 'Useful for checking duplicates before creating a new Story.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives among siblings like 'get_story' for single retrieval.

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