github_user_repos

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

No annotations provided. The description states it returns a page of repos, implying pagination, but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, error behavior (e.g., non-existent user), or what fields are returned. The phrase 'tech-stack signal' adds minimal behavioral context.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with 6 parameters, many siblings, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not describe the return format, pagination details, or how to interpret results for the mentioned tech-stack signal. An AI agent lacks sufficient context 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description adds no additional information beyond the schema; the 'tech-stack signal' hint does not relate to specific parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'a GitHub user's public repositories'. It also adds the context 'tech-stack signal' which hints at the use case. Among many Github sibling tools, this one is distinct for listing a single user's public repos.

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 github_org_repos or github_search_repositories. The description does not mention when-not-to-use or provide any context for tool selection.

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