linear_addAttachment

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

The description says 'Add', implying mutation (consistent with readOnlyHint=false). However, it provides no additional behavioral information such as whether duplicates are handled, rate limits, or side effects like notifications. Annotations do not cover these aspects.

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 only 6 words, which is too sparse. While concise, it sacrifices necessary information. The schema and annotations are not rich enough to compensate.

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 (8 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema description visible), the description is severely lacking. It does not cover what the attachment's URL, title, etc. refer to or how the optional fields (iconUrl, metadata, etc.) work.

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%, and the tool description adds no parameter details. With 8 parameters (3 required), the agent has no way to understand what each parameter means or how to use them correctly.

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 'Add an attachment to an issue' clearly states the verb (add) and resource (attachment to an issue). While concise, it is unambiguous and distinguishes the tool from siblings since no other add-attachment tool exists in the list.

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, or any prerequisites (e.g., does the issue exist? any permission needed?). The agent has no context to decide if this tool is appropriate.

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