get_repo_structure

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It only states the depth constraint but omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, permissions, or pagination. Destructive hint is absent but not contradicted.

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?

Single sentence, overly terse for a tool with 3 parameters and a tree return. Lacks structure; every word is earned but too little information is conveyed.

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 output schema exists, description still fails to clarify return format or depth semantics. Entirely incomplete for a tool that returns a tree structure; needs more context about what 'one level deep' means in practice.

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 coverage is 0% and description does not explain any parameter (repo, path, owner). Agent receives no guidance on how these fields work, e.g., path for subdirectory or owner for repo ownership. Completely inadequate.

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 retrieves a file/directory tree, limited to one level deep. This specific verb and resource distinguishes it from siblings like get_file (single file) and list_repos (list repositories).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Lacks context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or when not to use it (e.g., for deeper structures).

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