create_issue_from_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It describes parameters but does not reveal behavior such as validation of template names, error handling, or side effects beyond creation.

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 compact docstring with a one-sentence purpose and a clear bulleted Args section. Every line adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 6 parameters (3 required) and existence of an output schema, the description fully explains all parameters including the critical field format. No return value explanation is needed due to output schema.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds critical meaning: 'Project short name', enumerated template list ('bug, feature, task, daily, spike, release, devops'), field format ('Section: value' separated by '|||'), and optional flags for product and instance. This fully 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 'Create a YouTrack issue using a predefined template,' specifying the verb 'Create' and the resource 'YouTrack issue using a template'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_issue' (without template) and 'list_templates' by emphasizing template usage.

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 with templates via the 'template' parameter but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_issue'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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