Get group releases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add value beyond annotations by naming the error conditions (MissingParameterError for missing group_id, ParameterError for invalid params) and describing the return wrapper, but it omits pagination behavior despite page/per_page/max_pages/total_pages parameters.

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 scope sentence is front-loaded and useful, but the following docstring boilerplate ('Args: **kwargs: Additional parameters for the request') is vague and adds little. The Returns and Raises blocks earn their place; the generic kwargs line does not.

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 tool with 20 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is far too thin. An agent cannot determine valid values, defaults, or filtering semantics from it, and the error/return notes don't compensate for the parameter gap.

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 0% across 20 parameters, so the description must carry the load — and it does not. It only mentions group_id as an example 'additional parameter' and never explains what ref, sort, order_by, simple, milestones, include_html_description, or the pagination fields mean.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get information about releases in a group,' which cleanly distinguishes it from project-scoped siblings like gitlab_get_releases and gitlab_get_latest_release. It does not, however, explicitly call out those siblings or contrast scope.

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?

The description gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over gitlab_get_releases, gitlab_get_release_by_tag, or gitlab_get_latest_release. There are no stated prerequisites or exclusions beyond the implicit group scope.

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