Create Issue

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds the requirement for user authentication with write permissions, which is beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits like idempotency (annotations say false) or rate limits, so value added is moderate.

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, front-loaded sentence of 14 words. It conveys the core purpose efficiently without extraneous information, earning 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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description should compensate by indicating what is returned (e.g., the created issue object) or confirming success behavior. It does not, leaving the agent without expectation of the operation's result, which is insufficient for a create action.

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% with all parameters described in the JSON schema. The description does not add any additional semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Create') and the specific resource ('a new issue in a GitLab project'), with a prerequisite (authentication with write permissions). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_issue or delete_issue.

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 implies usage when a new issue needs to be created but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or list alternatives (e.g., 'for updating issues, use update_issue'). The authentication requirement is noted but not elaborated.

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