Request change request reviewers

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

Annotations indicate non-readOnly and non-idempotent, but the description adds no extra behavioral context such as side effects of repeated calls or required permissions.

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 very concise—one sentence plus the HTTP method. It is front-loaded, but could be slightly more informative without being verbose.

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?

Lacking details about the effect of requesting reviewers, the required body content, and the response. For a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), but the description adds no value, especially for the 'body' parameter which only says 'per the GitBook API' without specifying expected fields.

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 action 'Request change request reviewers' and specifies the HTTP endpoint, distinguishing it from read-only siblings like 'get_requested_reviewers'.

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 like 'get_requested_reviewers' or 'submit_change_request_review'. The description does not mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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