List pull requests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the purpose: it does not mention the default state of 'open', pagination via limit/offset, sorting behavior, or what the returned list contains.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the key filter dimensions. There is no filler or redundant phrasing.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and only 63% schema description coverage, the definition is too thin. It omits important operational details such as default state, pagination, sorting, and whether the response includes PR metadata, leaving an agent to infer behavior from the schema alone.

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 63%. The description names state and target branch, but the schema already documents 'base' and explicitly enumerates 'state'. It does not clarify defaults, sort values such as 'popularity' or 'long-running', direction, or pagination behavior for the undocumented enum parameters.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list pull requests in a repository. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as search_issues_and_prs or get_pull_request.

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 phrase 'Filter by state and target branch' hints at filtering, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_issues_and_prs, get_pull_request, or list_issues. No prerequisites or exclusions are provided.

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