gitea_workboard_config

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions 'redacted private', hinting at data sensitivity but without disclosing side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. It does not clarify if the operation is read-only or has destructive potential.

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 a single concise sentence, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. It is adequately structured but insufficiently informative.

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 optional parameter and existence of an output schema, the description lacks context about the workboard concept and what 'missing values' entails. It does not sufficiently explain the tool's role within the broader system of sibling tools.

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 input schema has 0% coverage, and the description does not mention the 'dotenv_path' parameter or its purpose, leaving the agent without necessary context to set it correctly.

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 the tool returns 'redacted private Gitea workboard configuration and missing values', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'local_workboard_config' by specifying Gitea context, though it could be more precise about what constitutes 'missing values'.

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 such as 'local_workboard_config'. The description fails to mention prerequisites, when not to use, or distinguish from similar tools.

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