Search GitHub repositories

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'raw' and 'normalized output' but does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the search is read-only. It is unclear what 'normalized output' means structurally, and there is no mention of pagination or default ordering behavior.

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 that leads with the primary purpose ('Raw github repository search') and then adds the usage hint. It is efficient and front-loaded, with no filler or redundant content.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return values and other operational details. It only says 'normalized output' without specifying the structure, and it does not address pagination, result count, or error handling. For a search tool with 5 parameters, this is insufficient for an agent to call it correctly without additional inference.

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 description coverage is 60%, leaving sort, limit, and minStars without descriptions in the schema. The description does not compensate for this by explaining any parameters. It adds no value beyond what the schema already provides for query and createdAfter, and leaves the other parameters unexplained.

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 the specific verb 'search' and resource 'github repositories', and adds 'raw' to indicate the search type. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like recommend_oss or repo_health. The phrase 'ad-hoc exploration' gives some hint, but the description does not name alternatives.

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 says 'Use for ad-hoc exploration,' which provides a context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternative tools such as recommend_oss or repo_health. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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