jira_get_ticket_bundle

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

No annotations are provided, but the description states the tool is read-only and returns a token-efficient payload. This adequately discloses the lack of side effects and efficiency benefits, though more details on rate limits or permissions are absent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and key benefit. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the main return content (issue, subtasks, linked issues, comments) and notes an output schema exists. It does not detail error cases or size limits, but for a retrieval tool with an output schema, this is adequate.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single 'key' parameter. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool returns a bundle of issue, subtasks, linked issues, and comments in a single call. It explicitly says it is the PRIMARY tool for /jira-dev and is read-only, distinguishing it from sibling tools that retrieve individual components.

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 strongly implies this tool should be used for one-call ticket context, avoiding multiple round-trips, and is primary for analysis. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios but provides clear context for when to prefer it over alternatives.

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