list_dashboard_pull_requests

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

With no annotations, the description accurately describes pagination, filtering by state and role, and the scope across all repos. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but for a read-only list tool, the behavioral coverage is good.

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 begins with a clear one-line summary, then provides concise parameter documentation in a structured format. No extraneous information, every sentence adds value.

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 tool's moderate complexity (6 params, list operation), the output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. The description covers all input parameters and pagination, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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?

Since schema coverage is 0%, the description adds full meaning to all 6 parameters, including possible values for state and role, default values, and the format for closed_since. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 it lists pull requests visible to the authenticated user across all repositories, distinguishing it from repo-specific list functions. The verb 'list' and resource 'dashboard pull requests' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage for a dashboard view across all repos but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_pull_requests or list_inbox_pull_requests. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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