pylon_get_issue_followers

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, error handling (e.g., if issue ID is invalid), or rate limits. The agent is left to assume basic read behavior without guarantees.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence delivers the core purpose without any extraneous information. Every word is necessary.

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?

For a simple list-retrieval tool with three well-documented parameters, the description is largely sufficient. The agent understands the action and resources, though adding a brief note about the response structure (e.g., paginated list of user identifiers) would improve completeness.

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 three parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional meaning. The tool's purpose implies a list output, but the description does not clarify the structure of the return value, which would be helpful given no output schema.

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 specifies the action ('Get') and resource ('list of users following an issue'), effectively distinguishing it from related siblings like pylon_get_issue and pylon_get_issue_body.

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 (e.g., pylon_update_issue_followers for modifying followers) or any prerequisites. The agent must infer usage from context.

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