github_gists_list_for_user

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, authentication requirements, or whether private gists are included. The schema hints at pagination via 'per_page' and 'page', but this is not highlighted.

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 concise but overly sparse. It fits in one sentence, but more detail could be included 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?

Given the lack of output schema and the presence of sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not mention the return format, ordering, or any constraints, making it insufficient for informed tool selection.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions, leaving no gaps. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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 tool lists gists for a specific user, which is distinct from listing the authenticated user's gists or public gists. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like github_gists_list or github_gists_list_public.

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. The description does not mention that this tool requires a username and is for fetching another user's gists, unlike other list gists tools.

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