wetrack_list_ticket_priorities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful behavior about resource filtering and soft-deleted priorities, but it does not mention response format, pagination, authentication requirements, or what happens when resource is omitted.

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 concise and well-structured: one clear purpose sentence followed by a compact Args block. Every sentence adds value, and the key action is front-loaded.

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?

The output schema covers return values, and both parameters are clearly described, making the tool callable. Minor gaps remain, such as explaining the effect of omitting resource and explicitly noting that resource is optional, but overall the definition is adequate for a simple list operation.

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 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It fully explains both parameters: resource with its three allowed values ('SPRINT', 'TASK', 'PROJECT') and include_inactive with its default of False and soft-delete behavior.

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 opens with 'Get the list of ticket priorities,' a specific verb and resource that clearly states the tool's function. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like wetrack_get_ticket_priority (single item) and create/update/delete variants.

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 conveys its purpose and parameter context, but it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as wetrack_list_ticket_statuses or wetrack_get_ticket_priority. There is no mention of when not to use it or what distinguishes it from other list tools.

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