github.search_repos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it only says what is searched. It does not mention authentication, rate limits, result ordering defaults, or pagination behavior for what is clearly a network-bound read 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first and no filler. Efficient, though the trailing 'topics' term is inaccurate and slightly muddies the concision.

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 fairly simple search tool with no output schema the description is minimally adequate, but with five undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no explanation of default sort or the 30-result cap, an agent lacks enough to invoke it optimally.

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, but it only gestures at query, language, and stars while omitting sort and limit entirely. It also advertises 'topics,' which is not in the schema, adding confusion rather than clarity.

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?

States a specific verb (search) plus the resource (GitHub repositories) and its main filter dimensions, so the agent can distinguish it from github.search_code at a glance. The mention of 'topics' is slightly misleading since no topics parameter exists, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this versus github.search_code or github.repo_overview, and no prerequisites or conditions given. The description only restates capability, leaving selection entirely to inference.

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