github_actions_list_repo_variables

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

With no annotations, the description holds the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List repository variables' and omits details about pagination, authentication requirements, or the nature of the response. The agent is left guessing about important behavioral traits.

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, which is appropriately sized for a simple tool. However, it lacks any structuring elements like lists or sections that could improve readability.

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?

Although the tool is relatively simple, the description does not complete the context. It does not mention that the tool returns a list of variables, that it requires owner and repo parameters, or any information about the output. Without this, the agent may not fully understand the tool's functionality.

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% coverage with descriptions for all 4 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, failing to explain parameters in the context of the tool's operation.

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 clear verb+resource pattern ('List repository variables'). It indicates the tool lists variables for a repository. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'github_actions_get_repo_variable' or 'github_actions_list_repo_organization_variables', which could cause confusion about scope.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus related tools such as 'get_repo_variable' or 'list_repo_organization_variables', nor does it provide context about prerequisites or alternatives.

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