Raw Jira REST API call

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions returning raw JSON and how to structure requests, but does not warn that methods like DELETE or POST can mutate Jira data, nor does it mention authentication, rate limits, or error behavior. For a raw passthrough tool, this is a meaningful gap.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, constraints are explicit, and examples are embedded without bloating the text. Every sentence earns its place.

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 description covers the core mechanics needed to make a call: path, query, body, and raw response. However, given the absence of annotations and an output schema, it is missing context about side effects, authorization, and error/response edge cases, which would matter for a generic API passthrough 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how to use the parameters together: query params go in query, JSON payload in body, and paths must stay under /rest/. The example paths also make the intent of the path parameter clearer.

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 a specific operation: calling any Jira REST API endpoint not covered by a dedicated tool. It also specifies the path constraint and gives concrete examples, which differentiates it from the many specialized sibling tools.

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 says to use this tool for endpoints not covered by a dedicated tool, which tells the agent when the tool applies. It also provides path restrictions and examples, but does not enumerate which siblings cover which endpoints, leaving some inference to the agent.

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