github_repos_get

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

Without annotations, the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication needs, or idempotency. The minimal description assumes the user knows it's a read operation, but no explicit information is given.

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?

While extremely concise, the single-phrase description is too minimal to be helpful. It lacks structure and does not earn its place by adding value beyond the tool name.

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 description fails to mention that the tool returns a repository object, nor does it explain any output. Without output schema, this information is critical but omitted. The description is incomplete.

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's parameter descriptions are tautological ('owner', 'repo'). The tool description adds no additional meaning; it does not clarify that owner is a GitHub username/org and repo is the repository name. Schema coverage is 100% but the existing descriptions are poor.

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 'Get a repository' states the basic action and resource, but it is vague and does not differentiate from numerous sibling tools like get_content, get_branch, etc. It lacks specificity about what exactly is retrieved.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not provide any context about prerequisites, scope, or situations where this tool is appropriate.

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