github_issue_search

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

The word 'cached' hints that results may not be real-time, but lacks specifics about freshness, scope, or any side effects. No annotations exist, so description must carry full behavioral disclosure; it does not adequately do so.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be expanded to include more context without losing efficiency.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is insufficient. Missing details on return values, pagination, and result format.

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 low (29%), and the description adds no parameter-level information. Despite having 7 parameters, the tool description does not explain their meaning or how they affect search behavior.

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?

Clearly states 'full-text search across cached GitHub issue and PR titles and bodies', specifying verb ('search') and resource ('issue and PR titles and bodies'). However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling search tools like `semantic_search` or `commit_search`.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use.

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