gitee_list_collaborators

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

The description states 'list', implying a read-only operation, but lacks details on pagination behavior, sorting, or the content of the response (e.g., fields like username, permissions). With no annotations, the description carries full burden and falls short.

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 sentence and to the point. It wastes no words, though it could be enhanced with additional context without losing conciseness.

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 no output schema and 4 parameters, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not explain pagination or the nature of the output, which is needed for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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%, so the parameters are fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, resulting in baseline score.

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 'List repository collaborators' clearly states the verb (List) and resource (repository collaborators). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like gitee_add_collaborator and gitee_remove_collaborator.

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 like gitee_check_collaborator for checking a specific collaborator. The description implies usage for listing all collaborators, but does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternative tools.

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