gh_list_releases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with these (no contradiction). However, it adds no extra behavioral context beyond what the annotations provide, such as pagination behavior or output limits, so it doesn't go above the baseline for a consistent read-only 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, focused sentence of six words, with no fluff. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 list operation with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description is mostly complete. The only minor gap is the lack of mention of pagination (especially relevant given the 'per_page' parameter), but this is not critical for basic usage.

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%, and the tool description does not explain any parameters. While 'owner' and 'repo' are self-explanatory and 'per_page' is a common pagination parameter, the description adds no value beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List releases in a repository' uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('releases in a repository'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'gh_get_release' (singular). The phrasing is unambiguous and directly conveys the tool's 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?

The description implies usage through the verb 'list' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives, such as 'gh_get_release' for a single release or mention of pagination considerations. The use case is inferred from the tool name and context, not stated.

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