Decompose feature

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

The description fully discloses behavior: it creates subtasks linked to the parent, deletes the parent (unless keepParent is true), and returns new tickets. This aligns with annotations (destructiveHint: true) and provides additional context beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences. The main purpose is stated first ('Replace one feature with a set of linked subtasks'), and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, nested subtasks, no output schema), the description covers the core action and return value. It lacks details on error cases or prerequisites, but is sufficient for a straightforward mutation 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?

While schema description coverage is 50%, the description adds meaningful context: it explains that the subtasks parameter is user-provided and that the tool creates them. It also implies the role of the 'ticket' parameter as the parent. This compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 tool's purpose: replacing a feature with linked subtasks. It uses specific verbs ('Replace', 'deletes') and resources ('feature', 'subtasks'). It distinguishes from siblings like add_feature or delete_task by focusing on decomposition.

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 when to use the tool (to break a feature into subtasks), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Context is clear, but lacks exclusions or guidance for edge cases.

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