Get repository commit

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. Description adds 'optional diff statistics' but doesn't disclose additional behaviors such as ref resolution or response shape; no contradiction with 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, no filler. Every word contributes.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with strong annotations and an output schema, the description is adequate. It could add explicit sibling differentiation (e.g., list_commit_diffs for full diffs), but the core behavior is clear.

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 describes project and sha but leaves stats as a bare boolean. Description's 'optional diff statistics' clarifies the stats parameter's purpose, adding meaning beyond the schema. Project and sha semantics are already covered by schema descriptions.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Fetch' with resource 'a GitLab commit' and optional diff statistics. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like list_commits (plural) and list_commit_diffs by targeting a single commit with optional stats.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The phrase 'Fetch a GitLab commit' implies use when retrieving a single commit, but it doesn't mention list_commits for multiple commits or list_commit_diffs for full diffs.

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