github_search_repositories

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

No annotations are provided, so the description discloses the rate limit (10 requests per minute for unauthenticated users) and implies read-only behavior. However, it does not mention authentication effects, pagination behavior, or response structure beyond the schema.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and adding a critical rate limit note. Every sentence adds value, no wasted words.

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 no annotations, the description is too brief for a search tool with 5 parameters. It lacks information on default results, sorting options (no enum values), pagination defaults, and what the response contains. The rate limit is helpful but insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema. No examples or syntax hints are provided for the query parameter or other fields.

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 it searches public GitHub repositories and specifies the use case of market/competitive discovery, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like github_search_users or github_repo.

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 for searching public repos but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like github_search_users or github_org_repos. The rate limit note provides some context but no direct comparison.

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