get_top_blocked_issues

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention read-only nature, required permissions, or any side effects. The tool appears to be a read operation but is not explicit.

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?

Main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a structured parameter list. While the parameter list adds length, it is necessary given the lack of schema descriptions. No redundant information.

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?

Covers basic parameters and purpose, but missing details like how priority score is calculated, whether results are system-wide or project-specific, and response shape. With an output schema present, return format is covered, but context is still incomplete.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides a separate 'Args' section explaining each parameter meaning and defaults, adding significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 it retrieves top blocked issues ranked by priority score. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_top_active_issues' by specifying 'blocked' but does not explicitly differentiate from others.

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 guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like 'search_issues' or 'get_issue'. No exclusions or prerequisites provided.

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