github_search_repos

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 explains the query syntax and parameters but does not disclose return format, pagination, rate limiting, or explicitly state that the operation is read-only. The behavior is implied by 'search' but not fully detailed.

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 well-structured and concise: it opens with a one-line purpose, then provides essential qualifier examples, and lists parameters in a clear arg block. Every sentence contributes and nothing is wasteful.

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 search tool with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers the main usage scenarios and parameters well. Minor gaps exist, such as not explicitly mentioning when to prefer alternative search tools or elaborating on session_name, but overall it is reasonably 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?

The schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the tool description compensates by thoroughly explaining each parameter: query with example, sort options with defaults, max_results default, and session_name. It adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Search GitHub repositories by query' and immediately distinguishes from sibling search tools (code, issues, users) by explicitly targeting repositories. It also uses specific qualifiers like language:python, stars:>100 to further clarify the functionality.

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 clear context—this tool is for repository search—and includes example queries with qualifiers. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool (e.g., 'for code search use github_search_code'), so it relies on the name and sibling list for differentiation.

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