Get release

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., not-found handling, authentication, or side effects). It simply restates the purpose without adding value beyond what annotations provide.

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, direct and front-loaded. Every word is useful, with no fluff or 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?

The description is too minimal for the tool's context. It does not explain the 'include_html_description' parameter, any edge cases (e.g., missing tag behavior), or differentiate from similar tools like get_tag or list_releases. While an output schema exists, the description still lacks enough guidance for an agent to reliably invoke the tool in all scenarios.

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 only 33% (only 'project' has a description). The tool description does not explain any parameters—it only hints at 'tag_name' via 'by tag name' but provides no details about format or the 'include_html_description' flag. With low schema coverage, the description must compensate, but it does not.

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 is specific and clear: 'Get one GitLab release by tag name.' It states the action (get), the resource (release), and the distinguishing qualifier (by tag name), which differentiates it from sibling tools like list_releases (plural) and get_tag (a different resource).

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 implies usage: use this tool when you need a single release identified by a tag name. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like list_releases or get_tag, leaving the decision to inference.

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