github.repo_tree

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses only that traversal is recursive. It omits auth/permission requirements, whether private repos work, rate-limit or size concerns for large trees, and how maxDepth interacts with the advertised recursion. Note that 'recursive' is slightly misleading given a default maxDepth of 3.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the verb and resource lead. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification, which is penalized under other dimensions.

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 an undocumented non-obvious parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, this is too thin. There is no indication of return shape (paths? nested nodes?), size limits, or how maxDepth governs the result, leaving an agent to guess.

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 coverage is 50%: 'repo' is documented as owner/repo, but maxDepth has no schema description and the description adds nothing about it. The word 'recursive' arguably implies depth control but never explains that maxDepth truncates traversal (default 3), so it does not compensate for the gap.

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?

Specific verb + resource: 'Get file tree of a GitHub repo' clearly states it returns a directory structure. It contrasts implicitly with github.repo_file (single file) and github.repo_overview, but never names or distinguishes them explicitly, so an agent must infer the split.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as github.repo_file or github.repo_overview despite their presence as siblings. '(recursive)' hints at scope but not at when this is the right tool.

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