github_get_pr

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get' without explicitly noting read-only behavior, authentication requirements, or the nature of the returned data. Since it's a 'get' operation, the read-only aspect is implied, but the description adds no extra context about behavior, errors, or side effects.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a bullet-like list of args. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and every line earns its place. No redundant or filler content.

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?

This is a simple getter tool with an output schema present, so the description need not detail return values. However, given the large sibling context and no usage guidance/alternatives, the description is somewhat incomplete. It covers the basics but leaves questions about when to use this instead of list_prs.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description's Args section provides brief but sufficient meanings for each parameter (owner, repo, pr_number, session_name). However, it lacks details like optionality (though schema shows default) or format constraints, and the explanations are minimal.

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 detailed information about a pull request' is a clear, specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like github_list_prs (which lists PRs) and mutation tools such as github_update_pr or github_merge_pr by focusing on fetching details of a single PR.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it retrieves a single PR by number, nor does it point to github_list_prs as the alternative for listing PRs. The intended usage is only implied by the tool name.

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