Get GitHub Activity

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 discloses that the call is live, external, and returns public repositories, and that it defaults to Daksh's username. However, it does not mention rate limits, failure behavior, or the shape of the returned repository list.

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?

Two sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded. The parenthetical about being a 'bonus tool' is somewhat meta and not essential for invocation, but it does help explain why this tool exists alongside static profile tools.

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?

For a simple read-only external API fetch with 0 required parameters and full schema coverage, the description covers purpose, source, liveness, and default behavior. With no output schema or annotations, a bit more detail about the returned repository fields would strengthen it, but it is largely sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%: both 'limit' and 'username' are documented in the schema, including defaults. The description adds only the contextual detail that the username defaults to Daksh's, which is already in the schema, so no significant value is added beyond the structured input.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Fetches a live list of recently updated public repositories for a GitHub user'. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling profile/experience/static-data tools by emphasizing 'live' and 'not static profile data'.

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?

Provides clear context that this is for live external GitHub API data rather than static profile data, which implies when to use it over siblings. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or formalize exclusions, but the 'not static profile data' phrasing gives practical routing guidance.

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