list_my_issues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'list issues' without disclosing read-only behavior, permission requirements, pagination, or how 'assigned to me' is determined (e.g., current user context).

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 with no fluff, efficiently conveying the core purpose. It earns its place by being immediately understandable.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool has 4 parameters with zero description coverage and no annotations. The description fails to explain parameter usage, behavioral traits, or when to prefer this over sibling tools, leaving the agent under-informed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the tool description adds no meaning to parameters like 'filters', 'state', 'limit', or 'platform'. The agent receives no guidance on how to use these parameters correctly.

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 'List issues assigned to me across all projects' clearly states the verb (list), resource (issues), and scope (assigned to me, across all projects). It distinguishes from siblings like list_issues (which likely requires a project scope) and list_all_issues (no assignment filter).

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 when the agent wants issues assigned to the current user, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_issues or list_all_issues. There is no mention of prerequisites or limitations.

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