github_apps_list_installations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral context. It only states 'List installations', with no mention of read-only nature, pagination, or any side effects. The existance of per_page and page params in the schema hints at pagination, but the description does not confirm this.

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, concise sentence. It is front-loaded with the core action. There is no fluff, but it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters and no output schema. The description only covers the basic purpose. It does not mention that results are paginated, how to filter (since, outdated), or what the response contains. While the schema covers parameters, the description should provide more context for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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%—all 4 parameters have descriptions in the input schema. The description adds no parameter information, but baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage. The description does not need to repeat parameter details.

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 'List installations for the authenticated app', specifying the verb (list) and resource (installations). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_installation or list_repos. However, it could be more explicit about the scope (all installations for the app).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like github_apps_get_installation or github_apps_list_installation_repos_for_authenticated_user. There is no mention of prerequisites, filters, or when not to use it.

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