List egg repositories

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the bar for added behavioral context is lower. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations — the dual-mode semantics where `repository` changes what is returned — and nothing in the description contradicts the 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?

Two tight sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded in the first sentence and the parameter-mode behavior in the second. No filler, no redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so return-value documentation is not required. With all parameters documented in a fully covered schema and the description clearly explaining the tool's dual-mode purpose, an agent has everything needed to invoke 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 coverage is 100% with all five parameters described, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only marginal param meaning — it restates the `repository` behavior that the schema already covers ('Repository UUID — list the eggs it offers instead of the repositories') without adding new detail for the other four parameters.

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 names a specific verb and resource — "List the git repositories eggs are synced from" — and adds the recency dimension ("when each last synced"). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling list_eggs tool by making clear this lists repositories, with the `repository` parameter switching to per-repository egg listing.

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 second sentence gives an implicit usage rule: pass `repository` to list eggs within one repository versus listing all repositories otherwise. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives (e.g., list_eggs) or state when to prefer them, but the conditional behavior is clear enough to guide a caller.

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