bitbucket_pull_request_list_by_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safe read-only profile is covered. The description adds the cross-repository scope and the whoami prerequisite, but does not disclose pagination/limits or result shape; this gap is modest given the annotations.

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?

Single sentence with the core action front-loaded and the useful whoami tip separated by an em dash. Every phrase earns its place; there is no filler or repetition.

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 read-only cross-repo listing tool, the description plus schema cover the required user parameter, workspace default, state filter, and result limit. No output schema exists, but the operation is simple enough that a standard list response can be inferred; the only notable gap is not explicitly contrasting with repository-scoped PR listers.

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 selectedUser and workspace parameters are already documented in the schema, and state is self-explanatory through its enum while maxItems has default/min/max constraints. The description only adds 'user's' and 'workspace' context, so at 50% schema coverage it only partially compensates for the undocumented parameters.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and a precise scope: 'a user's pull requests across every repository in a workspace.' This clearly identifies the operation and differentiates it from repository-scoped siblings like bitbucket_pull_request_list. The 'use bitbucket_whoami first' clause adds orientation without obscuring the action.

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 states a concrete prerequisite for the common case: run bitbucket_whoami first to list your own PRs. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but 'across every repository' strongly implies the distinction from repository-specific PR listers.

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