List GitHub App repositories

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds the scope that repositories are 'accessible to a GitHub App', which clarifies the subset returned. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, authentication needs, or what 'accessible' means in practice.

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 with no redundant words. The verb 'List' is present at the start and every word contributes meaning.

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 read-only list tool with one parameter and existing annotations, the description covers the essential purpose. It does not explain the return format, but given the absence of an output schema and the obvious nature of the result (a list of repositories), the description 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the single parameter (github_app_id) is self-explanatory and the description links it to the GitHub App. The description does not explicitly state where the ID comes from or its format beyond the schema's integer type, but the naming and context make the meaning reasonably clear.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'repositories accessible to a GitHub App', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like getGithubAppBranches (branches) and listGithubApps (the apps themselves).

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 implies when to use (when you need repositories for a GitHub App) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use, nor does it reference alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or comparisons with sibling tools.

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