gitea_repo_info

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies a read-only operation ('Get') but does not explicitly state that no modifications occur, nor does it mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or what 'detailed information' encompasses. The behavioral disclosure is minimal.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficiently structured, though the conciseness comes at the expense of completeness in other dimensions.

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 (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too sparse. It does not explain what 'detailed information' includes, whether it is read-only, or how it differs from listing tools. The agent lacks key context for correct usage.

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% with both parameters ('repo' and 'owner') having clear descriptions in the schema. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline 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 uses the verb 'Get' and the resource 'repository', clearly indicating a retrieval operation. It distinguishes from sibling 'gitea_repos' (likely a listing tool) by specifying 'detailed information' for a single repository, though it could explicitly state 'single repository'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'gitea_repos' for listing or other sibling tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or context, leaving the agent without decision support.

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