list_stars

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool lists starred repos with optional filters/sorting, but does not disclose pagination behavior via limit/offset, default sort order, read-only nature, authentication requirements, or response format.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler: 'List your GitHub starred repos, with optional language filter and sorting.' Every word contributes to the core purpose, making it appropriately concise.

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 the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too sparse for a tool with four parameters, including pagination. It does not explain limit/offset, default behaviors, or what the returned data looks like, leaving significant gaps for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 50% (sort and language have descriptions; limit and offset do not). The description mentions 'language filter and sorting' but does not clarify the pagination parameters (limit/offset), their defaults, or their interaction. It adds little meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List your GitHub starred repos'. It also mentions optional language filter and sorting, which differentiates it from sibling tools like search_stars (searching), get_star (singular retrieval), refresh_stars (sync), and stars_status (status).

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 is provided about when to use list_stars versus alternatives such as search_stars or get_star. There are no explicit when/when-not conditions or mentions of sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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