githubViewRepoStructure

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds crucial behavioral details in '<gotchas>': depth=2 slowdown, auto-filtering of noisy dirs (e.g., .git, node_modules), maximum 200 items, and the need to check summary.truncated. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with clear sections (<when>, <fromTool>, <toTool>, <gotchas>, <examples>) that are front-loaded and efficient. Every sentence provides actionable information with no redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse and apply.

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 complexity, output schema existence, and full schema coverage, the description covers all necessary aspects: use cases, workflow, gotchas, examples, and tool interactions. It leaves no critical gaps for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value through examples (e.g., path='', depth=1; path='src', depth=2) and gotchas that clarify parameter usage (starting from root, depth constraints). While not exhaustive, it enhances understanding beyond the 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?

The description clearly states 'Display GitHub repo structure' and positions it as an entry point for understanding layout and discovering paths. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like githubSearchCode and githubGetFileContent via the 'toTool' section, ensuring no ambiguity.

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 <when> section describing use cases (Understand layout, Discover paths, Entry point) and a workflow (Root depth=1, then Drill path+depth=2). Also includes 'fromTool' and 'toTool' sections that guide the agent on tool chaining, offering clear when-to-use and when-to-alternate guidance.

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