get_repo_stars_since

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

Discloses that one REST call is made per repo checked, important for cost/performance. Annotations already indicate readOnly (true) and destructive (false), so description adds value beyond that with the call-count warning.

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 zero wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, example, and a critical warning.

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 main function, parameter guidance, usage prompts, and performance consideration. With an output schema present, return value explanation is unnecessary. Minor omission of explicit top_n description, but overall sufficient.

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 has 0% coverage, so description must compensate. It explains the 'since' parameter format and default, and hints at 'max_repos' usage. However, 'top_n' and 'username' are not described, leaving gaps.

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?

Clearly states it returns repos owned by a username that received the most new stars since a given date. Verb and resource are specific, and it stands out from siblings focused on PRs and issues.

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 a natural language prompt example ('which repos gained the most stars in the last 30 days') and warns about per-repo REST calls with a conservative max_repos setting. Lacks explicit 'when not to use', but context is clear.

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