List GitLab issues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'List issues' and references a CLI command, but does not disclose pagination, sorting, rate limits, authentication requirements, or any side effects.

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, which is efficient, but it lacks essential details. Conciseness is achieved at the cost of completeness, making it minimally helpful.

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?

With 4 parameters and no output schema, the tool is moderately complex. The description fails to explain return format, pagination, filtering behavior, or typical use cases, leaving significant gaps.

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 coverage is 50%, but the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the input schema already provides. For example, the 'assignee' parameter has no schema description and no description compensation.

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 clearly states it lists issues for a project, combining a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like gitlab_mrs_list and gitlab_pipelines_list by targeting issues, but does not explicitly differentiate within the description.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gitlab_api or gitlab_mrs_list. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or typical usage context.

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