list_repo_tree_tool

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

With no annotations, description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. Only states what the tool does, not how it behaves (e.g., error handling, authentication, rate limits, output structure). Lacks context beyond minimal functionality.

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, no wasted words. Front-loaded with verb and resource. Appropriate length for a straightforward listing tool.

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 that output schema exists and parameter documentation is thorough, this description is adequate but minimal. Fails to mention key behavioral aspects like recursion or tree types. Agent may need to rely on schema entirely for context.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Does not elaborate on defaults or usage of tree_sha or recursive.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'List' and resource 'git tree (files and directories)' of a GitHub repository. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like get_file_content_tool which retrieves a file, and search_code_tool which searches code.

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, exclusions, or typical scenarios. Implies usage only through name and description.

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