github_list_gists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It explains the listing scope and parameter meanings, but does not mention that this is a read-only operation, authentication requirements for the specific-user mode, pagination behavior, or error handling. The description only states the basic listing action without deeper behavioral transparency.

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 compact and front-loaded with a clear one-sentence purpose, followed by a concise Args list. No unnecessary words.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, and the description covers the core purpose and parameters. However, it lacks important context such as whether authentication is required for viewing a specific user's gists, how pagination works beyond the default max_results, and any side effects. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the behavioral gaps prevent a higher score.

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 fully compensates by explaining each parameter: username (empty = authenticated), max_results (maximum, default 20), and session_name. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema properties.

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 'List gists for the authenticated user or a specific user' using a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling gist tools like github_get_gist and github_create_gist.

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 listing gists but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like github_get_gist or mention when to use this tool over others. It provides context for the username parameter (empty = authenticated user), which is a parameter-level usage hint, not tool-level guidance.

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