github_search_repos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the tool's basic action. It does not mention read-only nature, pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or any potential side effects, offering negligible transparency beyond the tool's name.

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 clear sentence with no redundant words. It is concise and front-loaded, effectively communicating the core function in minimal space.

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?

The description is too sparse for a tool with no output schema, no annotations, and multiple siblings. It does not mention return value structure, pagination options, or how results are ordered, leaving critical contextual information missing for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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?

The schema covers 50% of parameters (query has a helpful example, but per_page has no description). The tool description itself adds no parameter semantics, merely referencing 'keyword/query' without elaboration. The per_page parameter remains minimally explained, relying on its type and range to convey meaning.

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 'Search GitHub repositories by keyword/query' clearly states the verb (search) and resource (repositories), distinguishing it from github_search_code which searches code. It unambiguously conveys the tool's purpose.

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 the tool is for searching repositories by query but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives like github_list_repos or github_search_code. No exclusions or alternative comparisons are given, leaving usage context largely implicit.

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