stale_issue_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or requires specific permissions. The name suggests a report, but this is not confirmed.

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?

A single 15-word sentence is highly concise and front-loads the primary verb 'Find'. However, it could be slightly expanded to include key behavioral or usage details without losing conciseness.

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 the presence of an output schema and 3 parameters, the description provides the core functionality but lacks context on typical use cases, limitations (e.g., whether closed issues are included), and edge cases. It is minimally adequate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for 'days' by mentioning 'N days', and the grouping note implies how results are organized. However, it does not explain 'owner' and 'repo' beyond their names, nor the default value for 'days'.

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 tool finds issues with no activity in N days, grouped by label and assignee. It uses a specific verb 'Find' and identifies the resource 'issues', with distinctive grouping details that differentiate it from sibling tools like stale_pr_report.

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 implies usage for identifying stale issues but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., bulk_label_issues, close_resolved_issues). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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