get_repo_commits_today

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by specifying authentication context ('authored by the authenticated user'), date scope ('today's commits'), and detailed return format. It doesn't mention rate limits or error conditions, but provides substantial behavioral context.

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?

Perfectly structured with purpose statement, parameter documentation, return specification, and example. Every sentence earns its place, and information is front-loaded with the core functionality stated first.

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's moderate complexity, no annotations, but comprehensive output schema in the description, this is complete. The description covers purpose, parameters, authentication context, date scope, and detailed return format with example, leaving no gaps for the agent.

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 for the single parameter, the description fully compensates by explaining repo_name's semantics, acceptable formats (short name vs owner/repo), and resolution logic when short name is provided. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 the specific action ('Return today's commits'), target resource ('for a single repository'), and scope ('authored by the authenticated user'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on commits rather than summaries or repository listings.

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 implies usage context (today's commits, authenticated user's authorship) but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_daily_summary or list_repositories. 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.