get_repo

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

Without annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It correctly indicates a read operation ('get'), but does not disclose error handling, return format, or permissions. It provides baseline transparency for a simple retrieval tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential information with no extraneous words. It is perfectly concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple get-by-ID tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention what happens if the ID is not found, but given the tool's straightforward nature, it is 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for the only parameter 'id' ('Repo ID'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, hence a baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('git repository') with the lookup method ('by ID'). It distinctly differentiates from sibling tools like 'list_repos' which retrieves all repos, and 'create_repo' which creates new ones.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_repos' or other get tools. The description does not mention prerequisites like having the repo ID or any context about expected use cases.

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