list_releases_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'list' without explicitly stating that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention pagination limits, sorting behavior, or error conditions. The lack of any side-effect or safety disclosure is a notable gap.

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 a single sentence with no fluff or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, and every word contributes to the purpose. Effectively minimal.

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?

The tool is simple (list operation) and the schema is fully documented, so the description can be short. However, it omits any contextual hints about pagination, sorting, or comparison with get_release_tool. While not fatally incomplete, it does not actively guide the agent beyond the bare statement.

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% (all parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it does not explain parameter relationships or non-obvious usage. It neither helps nor hurts 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 the verb (list) and resource (releases) with the scope (for a GitLab project). It distinguishes from get_release_tool by using 'list' (plural) and from create_release_tool by the verb. The action is unambiguous and easily separated from siblings.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_release_tool or list_milestones_tool. It does not mention prerequisites, common use cases, or exclusions. Without any context, an agent has to infer usage solely from the name.

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