Get Issues

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

With no annotations beyond the title, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'fetches' clearly implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. It is minimally transparent but not misleading.

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 a single concise sentence (8 words) that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundant or filler content.

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 is adequate for a simple filtered list tool given the rich input schema and presence of an output schema. However, it lacks explicit usage guidance relative to siblings and does not clarify the logical combination of filters (AND/OR) beyond the brief phrase. It is minimal but not incomplete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'by user ID and/or project ID' adds a minor clarification that both filters can be combined, which is not explicit in the schema's 'Use this or project_id' language. However, it does not add detail about the timestamp parameters, leaving the schema to carry that weight.

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 'Fetches issues filtered by user ID and/or project ID' clearly specifies a verb (fetches), resource (issues), and the filtering scope. The plural 'issues' distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'get_issue' (singular), and the resource name separates it from 'get_users' and 'get_projects'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool instead of the sibling 'get_issue' or when not to use it. It simply states what the tool does without mentioning alternatives or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the tool name.

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