github_list_prs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without revealing that it is a read-only operation, its default behavior (e.g., returning open PRs by default), or any pagination limits. This is a significant gap for a tool that lists potentially many records.

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, clear sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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?

The description is minimally viable for a straightforward list operation, but it lacks guidance on when to use it instead of related tools and provides no behavioral context (like defaults or read-only nature). The presence of an output schema helps, but the description's brevity leaves gaps in usage direction.

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?

All parameters are well-documented in the input schema (100% coverage) with descriptions and defaults. The tool description itself adds no parameter information, but the schema carries the load. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the description does not need to duplicate schema details.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('pull requests for a repository'), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like github_list_issues or github_get_pr. However, it lacks any additional scoping or distinguishing details, such as filtering options or whether it returns multiple items.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like github_get_pr or github_list_issues. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions. An agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema alone.

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