Find VCS provider by repository URL

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral details beyond the annotations, such as whether the tool returns a single provider or throws an error if none found, which would be useful for a lookup 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?

The description is a single sentence with zero wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple lookup tool.

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 simple nature of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not explain the return value or behavior when no matching provider is found. Without an output schema, some description of the response would improve completeness.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'repository_url'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Finds a VCS provider by repository URL' clearly states the verb (finds), resource (VCS provider), and method (by repository URL). It distinctively differs from sibling tools like 'get_vcs_providers' (list all) and 'get_vcs_provider_repositories' (list repos for a provider).

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get_vcs_providers' for listing all providers or 'add_vcs_provider' for creating one. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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