list_issues

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

Discloses pagination behavior (1-based page, limit <=100, iterative paging), state default, and the critical detail that Gitea includes pull requests. No annotation provided, so description carries full burden; it covers key behaviors but lacks explicit read-only or auth info.

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?

Concise: 3 sentences plus example. Logically ordered: purpose, pagination, filters, risk/alternative. Every sentence is 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?

Covers pagination, filters, and alternative for pure issues. No output schema, so return format is implied but not explicit. Slightly incomplete, but adequate for a list tool.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value beyond schema by explaining pagination iteration, the 1-based page, state default, and the risk of pull requests. Example clarifies usage.

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?

Clearly states 'List issues in one Gitea repository' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling search_issues by noting the risk of pull request inclusion and suggesting the alternative for pure issues.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use this tool vs search_issues: 'to list only issues use search_issues with type="issues"'. Also provides an example call.

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