List releases

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations' readOnlyHint. It doesn't disclose that the operation is safe, what data is returned (e.g., release tags, dates, descriptions), or pagination behavior. Given annotations already cover the safety profile, the description should have provided additional context like 'Returns all releases with metadata and links.'

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 extremely short (4 words) but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. For a tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, it leaves critical information unstated. The structure lacks front-loaded action and purpose.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and a complex GitLab API context, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what a release is, what the tool returns, how pagination works, or when to use it relative to other tools. The agent must rely entirely on the parameter schema and name inference.

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 100%, so all five parameters (page, limit, per_page, all_pages, project_id) already have clear descriptions. The description adds no extra semantic value, but the full schema coverage justifies the baseline score of 3.

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 'Releases of a project.' is a noun fragment that essentially restates the title 'List releases' without a clear verb or action. It fails to specify what the tool does (e.g., 'Retrieves a list of releases for a GitLab project') and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like gitlab_list_tags or gitlab_list_commits.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that it lists releases, when pagination should be used, or that it complements gitlab_create_release. No context about typical use cases or exclusions is provided.

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