gh_get_release

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the basic action, such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or response structure. It neither enriches nor contradicts the annotations.

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 one sentence with zero superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the action verb and immediately states the resource. This is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval 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 the tool's simplicity, the presence of annotations, and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the primary purpose without needing to describe return values (handled by output schema). However, it is slightly terse and does not mention any potential edge cases or special behaviors, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter explanations. However, the description provides no information about the parameters (owner, repo, tag) beyond implying that 'tag' identifies a specific release. This is minimal and does not meaningfully add to what the parameter names already convey.

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 tool's action: 'Get details of a specific release.' It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('release'), and the qualifier 'specific' distinguishes it from sibling tool gh_list_releases, which retrieves multiple releases.

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 usage for retrieving a single release, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention sibling tools like gh_list_releases. The context signals provide sibling names, but the description itself offers no direct guidance, making the usage implied rather than explicit.

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