jira_get_issue

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

The description labels the tool as 'read-only', which is a key behavioral trait. However, no other behaviors are disclosed (e.g., error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs). Given the tool's simplicity, the single trait is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentence that conveys the essential action and resource. While very concise, it could be slightly expanded without losing efficiency. It earns a high score for being front-loaded and free of 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 tool's low complexity (1 required parameter, 2 total, with an output schema), the description covers the basic function. However, it lacks usage guidelines and does not leverage the existence of the output schema to provide additional context. It is minimally complete.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (key and fields) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 fetches a single Jira issue and notes it is read-only. While it identifies the resource and action, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like jira_get_epic, but the specificity of 'single Jira issue' is sufficient.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer this over jira_search or jira_get_epic_issues, nor does it specify prerequisites or context.

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