list_pull_requests

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

Describes pagination logic, filter behavior, and default state. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Does not mention any side effects or rate limits, but as a read operation it's adequate.

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 sentences and an example, no filler. Front-loaded with main purpose, then pagination and filters. Efficient and clear.

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, all filters, and provides example. Does not describe return format, but since no output schema, it is moderately complete for a list operation. Could mention result type briefly.

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%, but description adds value: explains pagination (page/limit usage), labels as comma-separated names, milestone ID, and gives an example. This helps beyond raw schema.

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 pull requests in one Gitea repository.' The verb 'list' and resource 'pull requests' are specific. Distinguishes from siblings like search_issues which is for cross-repo search.

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?

Provides explicit pagination behavior (page 1-based, limit <=100, keep paging until fewer than limit). Gives example usage. Mentions alternative cross-repo search via search_issues.

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