list_github_reposList the GitHub repositories you have connected to Dockhold, across every installation. Call this before deploy_app when the target repo is private, or when the user asks which repos they can deploy. Each repo comes with its installation_id: pass that (with the repo's clone URL) to deploy_app to deploy a PRIVATE repository. Public repos don't need it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: lists across every installation, each repo includes an installation_id, and the private-repo deployment flow. This is useful but does not cover every possible return detail.
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?
Three sentences, no wasted words. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by when-to-use and how to use the returned installation_id.
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?
For a parameterless list tool, the description covers scope ('across every installation'), use cases, and required integration with deploy_app for private repos. No output schema exists, but the description communicates the key output element (installation_id) and its purpose.
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?
There are no parameters and the schema is empty (100% coverage), so the description need not explain inputs. The baseline of 4 is appropriate since no parameter ambiguity exists.
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 lists GitHub repos connected to Dockhold across every installation. The verb 'List' with the specific resource 'connected GitHub repos' is distinct from sibling deploy/log tools.
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?
Provides explicit guidance: call this before deploy_app for private repos, or when the user asks which repos can be deployed. It also explains how to use the result (pass installation_id and clone URL to deploy_app).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct operation: deployment, monitoring, scaling, configuration, or listing. There is no overlap; agents can easily select the correct tool.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., deploy_app, get_app_logs, resize_database). No naming irregularities.
12 tools cover the core operations of a deployment platform without bloat or missing essentials. The count is well-scoped.
Covers deploy, manage, scale, and monitor effectively. Missing only minor operations like deleting an app or environment variable, but the core workflow is complete.