gitRepos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'retrieves' implies a read operation, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether authentication is required, what format the list returns, if there's pagination, rate limits, or any filtering/sorting capabilities. The description provides minimal behavioral context.

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, efficient sentence that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool with no parameters.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the returned list contains, the format, whether it includes all repositories or just accessible ones, or any authentication requirements. Given the lack of structured data elsewhere, the description should provide more complete 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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since there are none, though it could potentially mention that no filtering options are available (which would be a semantic clarification).

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 ('Retrieves') and resource ('list of Git repositories'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from potential sibling tools like 'gitPullRepo' or 'gitCreateRepo' beyond the basic retrieval function.

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. With sibling tools like 'gitExternalRepoInfo' and 'remoteRepoInfo' available, the description offers no context about when this list retrieval is appropriate versus getting detailed info about specific repositories.

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