buygit_get_listing

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It comprehensively discloses included data: secret-scan status, malware flag, upstream health, repo signals, license compatibility warning, pricing, and similar listings. No destructive behavior mentioned; appears read-only. Could add note about safe repetition.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence captures purpose and key consolidation benefit. Second sentence lists contents and a critical prerequisite. Highly efficient.

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 moderate complexity, presence of output schema, and comprehensive description covering main outputs and usage prerequisite, the description provides sufficient context for correct agent invocation.

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 100%, so baseline 3. Description adds value by clarifying slug must come from a prior search/trending/random/compare result, which is useful context beyond the schema's basic description.

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 retrieves full details for a BuyGit listing, consolidating three separate calls (license, supply-chain risk, popularity). It lists many specific fields and mentions that the slug must come from prior tools like buygit_search, distinguishing it from siblings.

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?

Explicitly states the slug must come from a prior tool result, providing clear context for when to use. It implies this is for consolidated view, but does not explicitly exclude cases where deeper audit (buygit_audit_repo) or comparison (buygit_compare) would be more appropriate.

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