list_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 discloses that results are 'most recent' and that pull requests are excluded, but does not explain ordering, pagination, or authentication requirements. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states the purpose, the second adds key behavior. Every word earns its place.

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 purpose, filtering options (state, labels, time), and result nature (most recent, no pull requests). It lacks mention of pagination, but the schema has a limit parameter. For a simple list tool, it is fairly complete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about 'most recent issues' and filtering out pull requests, but these are not parameter-specific. The description does not add significant 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 action ('List issues'), the resource ('GitHub repository'), and includes specific behavior ('Returns the most recent issues in the specified state. Pull requests are filtered out.'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_issue (single issue) and list_pull_requests.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: to list issues with filtering by state, labels, and time. It implicitly distinguishes from list_pull_requests by noting pull requests are filtered out. No explicit when-not-to-use, but the context is sufficient.

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