github_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly states what information is returned (connection status, user, rate limits) which is helpful. However, it doesn't disclose whether this triggers any side effects, whether it requires an active session to succeed, or what happens when the session doesn't exist. An output schema is present, which partially offsets the need to describe return values.

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?

Extremely concise - one sentence describing the purpose plus a one-line param explanation. Uses the Args format which is clean and front-loaded. Every element earns its place with zero wasted 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?

For a simple status-checking tool with a single optional parameter and an output schema, the description is reasonably complete. The purpose and return-value intent are clear. However, given there's no annotations and the schema covers nothing about session_name semantics, slightly more context about what 'session' means and how status differs from what github_get_user returns would strengthen completeness.

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 single parameter session_name has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does add 'Session to check (default: default)' which explains its meaning minimally. However, it doesn't clarify what a 'session' refers to (e.g., saved credentials per github_save_credentials or an active connection) or how session names are established, which would help the agent choose the right value.

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?

Description clearly states what the tool does: show connection status, authenticated user info, and API rate limits. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like github_connect (which establishes connection) or github_get_user (which fetches user data). Could be improved by explicitly noting it's the diagnostic/session-status tool among the GitHub family.

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 it's a status-check tool for debugging or verifying session health, but doesn't explicitly say when to use it vs alternatives. The session_name argument hints at checking sessions established via github_connect, but there's no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternatives for checking auth state.

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