github_list_releases

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions routing details (JWT, tenant, scope) but fails to state that the tool is a read operation, what data it retrieves, or whether it has any side effects. Critical behavioral traits like pagination or required permissions are omitted.

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 concise (3 sentences) but wastes the first sentence restating the name. The second sentence provides routing context that is unlikely to aid tool selection. Every sentence should add value; here, only the third sentence partially addresses the parameter. It is not egregiously long, but could be more efficient.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (GitHub releases) and presence of an output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the tool's operation, how to construct the arguments, or any constraints. An agent would have no clue about the tool's behavior from this description alone.

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 coverage is 0% for the single parameter. The description merely states 'arguments: JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' which adds no meaning beyond the schema's type definition. It does not explain what keys or values the JSON string expects, leaving the agent without necessary parameter guidance.

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 merely restates the tool's name as 'Github connector operation `list_releases`', adding no functional explanation of what listing releases means. Among many sibling list tools (e.g., github_list_branches, github_list_issues), there is no differentiation, leaving the agent to infer purpose from the name alone.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, making it unhelpful for an agent deciding between github_list_releases and other GitHub list operations.

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