github_list_prs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly communicates the operation and parameter effects (e.g., state filters, sorting), but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or result ordering details beyond what parameters imply. This is adequate for a straightforward read-only list operation.

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 structured as a purpose line followed by a clear list of parameter explanations. It is slightly verbose but each line provides necessary information. It is front-loaded with the purpose and avoids unnecessary fluff.

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 description covers all six parameters and clearly states the purpose. The output schema exists, so return value details are handled elsewhere. It lacks explicit usage examples or edge-case handling, but for a list operation with well-documented parameters, it is sufficiently complete.

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%, meaning the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It explains every parameter, including enum values for 'state' and 'sort' (which are not present in the schema), and defaults. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of 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 begins with 'List pull requests for a repository,' which clearly states the action (list) and the resource (pull requests). This distinguishes it from siblings like github_get_pr (single PR) and github_list_issues (different resource type).

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 when not to use it, nor does it reference related tools like github_get_pr or github_list_issues. The usage context is only implied by the operation name.

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