jira_get_subtasks

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

No annotations were provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention other behaviors like pagination, result structure, or error conditions beyond what the input schema suggests.

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, short sentence that conveys the core purpose immediately. It is front-loaded and concise, though it could benefit from a tiny bit more context without losing brevity.

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 low complexity (single parameter, output schema present), the description is minimally sufficient. It tells the agent what the tool does and its safety profile. However, it omits explanation of the parameter and any usage context, making it slightly lacking for a new agent.

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 schema coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no additional meaning for the 'key' parameter beyond its name. It does not explain what the key represents (e.g., Jira issue key) or any constraints (e.g., format, required).

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 action (List) and the resource (subtasks of a Jira issue), and explicitly marks it as read-only. It distinguishes from sibling tools like jira_get_issue or jira_get_epic_issues by focusing specifically on subtasks.

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 for listing subtasks of a given issue, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., jira_get_issue might return subtasks in its fields). No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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