check_ci_status

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

Describes return structure and edge case (no runs), but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether it triggers runs), authentication needs, or rate limits. No annotations to supplement.

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 brief paragraphs: purpose and output format. No fluff, though output format could be omitted if structured schema were provided.

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?

Covers return values, edge case, and basic purpose. Missing explanation of optional parameters and defaults, but with 3 params (1 required), it's mostly adequate.

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 0%, and the description only mentions 'branch' contextually. 'owner' and 'repo' are not explained at all, leaving the agent guessing about defaults and scope.

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?

Clear verb 'check', specific resource 'CI workflow status for a branch', and differentiates from siblings like get_ci_logs and issue/PR tools.

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?

Implied usage for checking CI status, but no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparisons with alternatives like get_ci_logs.

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