Log a company-reported bug

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

Annotations show no special hints (readOnly false, etc.). Description adds that it creates a bug and links/records, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., notifications, idempotency, permissions needed). Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No fluff; every word adds value. Efficient and clear.

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?

Tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no return value description. Covers core action but omits what is returned (e.g., bug ID). Missing behavioral context and usage prerequisites.

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?

Description does not explain parameters beyond schema. Schema has 25% coverage (only 'company' described). No added meaning for 'title', 'project', or 'description'. Fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states it logs a company-reported bug, creates a board bug (FBB-###), links to company, and records report. Distinguishes from siblings like 'log_bug' and 'resolve_company_bug' by specifying the company context.

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?

Implied usage from description (company-reported bugs) but no explicit guidance on when to use vs. 'log_bug' or when not to use. Lacks alternatives or exclusions.

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