update_repo

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses PATCH semantics, rename effect on URL, and ability to clear description/website with empty string. Could be improved by mentioning required permissions or lack of destructive side effects beyond rename.

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 efficiently convey purpose, PATCH nature, editable fields, and important warnings. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema, but description states 'Returns the updated repository'. Covers all 7 optional parameters with special behaviors (clearing, rename). Completes the context for effective agent use.

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 valuable usage guidance: empty string to clear description/website, branch must exist, rename caution. This significantly aids correct parameter use.

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 the verb 'Edit' and the resource 'ONE repository's metadata', specifies it's a PATCH operation, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, delete, list, etc.

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 clear when-to-use context and lists editable fields. Includes a caution about renaming with 'name'. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives, but the purpose is clear.

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