get_git_repositories

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full burden. It fails to mention important behavioral aspects such as pagination, filtering, ordering, error handling, or authentication requirements. For a list tool, this information is critical.

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, focused sentence with no redundancy. It could be slightly expanded without becoming verbose, but it earns its place.

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?

Lacks output schema, so description should hint at return structure (e.g., names, URLs). Does not explain how repos are identified or selected. Incomplete for making an informed selection decision.

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 100%, with each parameter described. The description adds value by suggesting using 'list_organizations' for available organizations for the 'organization' parameter, which is helpful. However, it does not clarify that at least one of projectId or projectKey is required (both optional in 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 'Returns list of Git repositories for a project' clearly states the action (returns list), resource (Git repositories), and scope (for a project). It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'get_git_repository' (singular) by explicitly indicating a list operation.

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 guidance on when to use this list vs the singular 'get_git_repository' or other list tools. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., need projectId or projectKey) or scenarios where the tool is appropriate.

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