Use when the user wants one concrete open-source contribution opportunity for an indexed GitHub login. Read-only, rate limited, and does not reserve the issue. Example: {"login":"sajeetharan"}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| login | Yes | Public GitHub login already indexed by DevGlobe |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mission | Yes | ||
| profile | Yes | ||
| resultCount | Yes | ||
| reservationDisclaimer | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it is 'rate limited' and 'does not reserve the issue', clarifying side effects not visible in the schema or annotations.
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: usage context in the first, behavioral caveats and a concrete example in the second. Every sentence earns its place, and the front-loaded 'Use when' clause is immediately actionable.
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 tool with one clearly documented parameter, strong annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential extras: rate limiting, non-reservation, and the indexed-login prerequisite. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it correctly.
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 100%, and the single parameter login is already described as a 'Public GitHub login already indexed by DevGlobe'. The description reinforces this with an example JSON payload, which is convenient but does not add substantial semantic meaning beyond the schema.
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 'one concrete open-source contribution opportunity' for a GitHub login, which conveys the resource and expected output. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like search_developers or match_developers_to_repository by focusing on a single previewed contribution opportunity, though it does not explicitly name a differentiating verb.
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 opens with 'Use when the user wants one concrete open-source contribution opportunity', making the intended context explicit. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when this tool fits.
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.
The discovery-oriented tools (search_developers, find_similar_developers, match_developers_to_repository, get_trending_developers) all return developers, but each is anchored to a distinct input—query, login, repository, or recency—so an agent can tell them apart. The remaining tools (profile, introduction status, contribution preview, request introduction) are clearly separated by action.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: search, find, get, match, preview, request. The noun clearly indicates the resource or action target, with no mixed casing or vague verbs.
Eight tools is a well-scoped surface for developer discovery and introduction. Each tool serves a distinct part of the workflow, and the count feels neither bloated nor thin.
The core workflow is covered: discovery, profile lookup, contribution preview, introduction request, and status check. A cancel or list introductions capability would round out the introduction lifecycle, but the essential agent journeys have no dead ends.
