list_releases

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: pagination details (1-based, limit <=100, continuation strategy), filter semantics, and the structure of returned releases (fields like id, tag_name, name, body, draft, prerelease, attachments).

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 efficiently written with no wasted words, front-loading the purpose, then logically flowing to pagination, filters, return fields, and an example, all in a single clear paragraph.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete: it covers pagination, filters, return field semantics, and even links the id to other tools. It enables an agent to use the tool correctly without ambiguity.

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 the description adds significant value by explaining pagination continuation logic, filter usage (draft and prerelease), default values for repo and owner, and an example call, far exceeding the bare schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'List releases in one Gitea repository' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_release and list_pull_requests by focusing on releases and pagination.

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?

The description provides explicit pagination strategy ('keep paging until a page returns fewer than limit') and explains optional filters, but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives like get_release for single releases.

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