bitbucket_repository_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safe read-only behavior is covered structurally. The description 'Get details' is consistent with those annotations and adds no additional behavioral context, but it also does not contradict them.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the operation and the resource.

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 read-only get operation with named parameters and one described parameter in the schema, the description is reasonably complete. It does not explain return contents, but no output schema exists and 'details' is acceptable shorthand for a repository fetch.

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 description coverage is 50%; the workspace parameter is described in the schema, while repoSlug is not. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the tool name, though 'one repository' helps connect repoSlug to the target resource. This is adequate but not compensating.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get details of one repository.' The word 'one' differentiates it from sibling tool bitbucket_repository_list, but 'details' is not elaborated, so the exact nature of the return value is left somewhat vague.

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 provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bitbucket_repository_list or bitbucket_source_get. The name implies a singular fetch, but the description does not explicitly state selection criteria or exclusions.

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