Listar repositorios de GitHub

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It implicitly conveys read-only behavior ('Obtiene y muestra') and states that a GitHub account must be authenticated, which is useful context, but it says nothing about rate limits, result volume, or pagination behavior. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves meaningful gaps.

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 the purpose before the usage trigger, with no redundant filler. The synonym list ('ver, consultar, buscar o listar') is slightly padded but serves keyword-based tool matching, so it largely earns its place.

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 listing tool with two fully documented, optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential what-and-when. The main omission is pagination/return-volume context, which is only lightly implied by the schema.

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 100% and both parameters (page, per_page) are fully documented with defaults, ranges and meanings in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter guidance, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Obtiene y muestra los repositorios') and scopes it to 'la cuenta de GitHub autenticada'. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling write tools (create-repository, create-issue, create-commit), though it does not name or contrast with any of them explicitly.

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 second sentence gives explicit trigger conditions ('cuando el usuario quiera ver, consultar, buscar o listar sus repositorios'), which is strong when-to-use guidance. However, it offers no when-not-to-use conditions and does not route to alternatives such as list-issues for issue-related queries.

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