jira_get_transitions

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the tool's purpose but does not clarify whether it is read-only, what constitutes a transition, or if results depend on user permissions. Minimal transparency beyond the implied non-destructive nature.

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?

A single sentence is concise, but it may be too brief. While it contains essential information, it lacks structure or elaboration that could be helpful without being verbose. Scores a 3 as adequately concise but not optimally informative.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema (not shown but present). The description is sufficient for basic understanding but omits typical use context, like suggesting it be used before jira_transition_issue. Additional guidance would improve completeness.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist in the schema. The tool's description does not add any meaning for the only parameter 'issue_key' beyond what is already known from its name. No details on format or constraints.

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 'Gets available transitions for a Jira issue' clearly states a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like jira_transition_issue (which performs transitions) and jira_update_issue (which modifies fields). However, it could be more precise by specifying that transitions refer to status changes.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as calling it before jira_transition_issue to get possible transitions. There is also no mention of prerequisites like issue existence or permissions.

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