search_issues

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

The description does not disclose behavioral aspects such as pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or the structure of the response. With no annotations, the description fails to inform the agent about important operational details.

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 very concise (one sentence), but at the expense of completeness. It is not front-loaded with important details; it merely restates the name.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain return values or behavior, but it does not. Given the complexity of GitHub's issue search API, the description is insufficiently complete.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, achieving baseline. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but does not detract from it.

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 states 'Search for issues in GitHub repositories' which is clear but fails to differentiate from sibling tools like list_issues or get_issue. It does not specify whether it searches across all repositories or within a specific repo, nor does it mention the use of GitHub's search syntax.

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 search_issues versus other tools like list_issues or get_issue. The description does not provide context for when this tool is appropriate or when alternative tools should be considered.

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