Gitopia MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It compensates well by detailing the return structure (JSON array with specific fields: id, amount, state, etc.) and default pagination behavior. Minor deduction for not explicitly declaring the read-only/safe nature of the operation, though implied by 'list' and 'discover'.

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?

Three well-structured sentences with zero waste: use case declaration, return value specification, and sibling tool references. Information is front-loaded with the invocation trigger. Each sentence earns its place.

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 single optional parameter and lack of output schema, the description adequately compensates by enumerating return fields. Minor gaps remain regarding sorting order, whether 'available' implies state filtering, and pagination cursor behavior, but overall complete for the tool's complexity.

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 the baseline applies. The description confirms the 'limit' parameter is optional with default 50, matching the schema exactly. It adds no additional semantic context (e.g., max limit, performance implications) beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Description uses specific verbs ('discover', 'review') with clear resource ('bounties') and scope ('available'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling 'get_bounty' by positioning this as a discovery/status-check tool versus a detailed retrieval tool.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use ('Use this when you need to discover...'), explicit alternative selection ('Use get_bounty to get full details'), and cross-references siblings ('See also: get_bounty, create_bounty'). This offers complete guidance for tool selection.

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