Gitea: List issues

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact beyond annotations — that results are paginated — but omits the implicit default of state=open, whether closed issues are excluded, and any auth or rate-limit context.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler and the core action front-loaded. Brevity here is not verbosity in disguise, though the saved space was not reinvested in documenting the filters it advertises.

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?

With 8 parameters at zero schema coverage, no output schema, and only a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is far too thin for the tool's surface area. Nothing explains filter semantics, pagination envelope, or default state, which an agent needs to call this correctly.

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 0% across 8 parameters, so the description carries the full burden and fails to meet it. It never mentions q, state (defaulting to "open"), labels, page, or limit, leaving callers to guess filter semantics and pagination controls from bare property names.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List issues in a Gitea repository") plus the scoping qualifier "with filters," which distinguishes it from the create/close issue siblings. It does not explicitly differentiate from near-neighbors such as gitea_list_issue_comments, and the bracketed "[UNIFIED]" tag conveys no meaning to an agent.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says when to prefer this over a search, over gitea_list_issue_comments, or under what conditions a caller would combine q/labels/state. "With filters" hints that filtering is possible but gives no direction on choosing or combining them.

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