Get Tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, but does not contradict them.

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 short sentence, concise and front-loaded. However, it may be overly brief for a tool with no output schema, missing potential return value information.

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 no output schema and only 2 simple parameters, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not explain what the returned tag object contains (e.g., commit SHA, message). The annotations cover behavioral safety, but the description lacks return value context.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It only hints at the tag_name parameter via 'by name' but provides no detail on tag_name format, required/optional status, or project_id usage. The schema itself lacks descriptions, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 'Get a repository tag by name' clearly specifies the action (Get), resource (repository tag), and method (by name). It distinguishes from sibling tools like gitlab_list_tags (listing) and gitlab_get_tag_signature (getting signature).

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 provided; does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like gitlab_list_tags or gitlab_get_tag_signature. The description is minimal and lacks context on prerequisites or exclusions.

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