Github Create Release

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

Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and do not reveal irreversibility or the update behavior. The description discloses that overwriting published notes cannot be undone, and explains exactly what the update path does (drops make_latest, generate_release_notes, replaces changelog with body). This adds significant context beyond annotations, with no contradiction.

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 two paragraphs, with the primary action and warning front-loaded. The reference to '#401' is cryptic and adds noise, and the second paragraph is somewhat dense but still focused. It is appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool and does not waste words.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown), so return values are likely covered there. The description covers the key behavioral nuances: failure on existing tag, update semantics, and parameter behavior in the update path. It does not mention how the response indicates which path occurred, but the output schema likely provides that. Overall, it is complete for the tool's purpose.

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 only 10% (only if_exists has a description). The description compensates by explaining if_exists behavior and the impact on make_latest and generate_release_notes in the update path. However, other parameters like body, draft, prerelease, repo_owner, etc. are not elaborated, though their meaning is fairly obvious from names. The description adds value for the tricky parameters, but not complete coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Publishes') and resource ('a release for a tag'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like github_update_release and github_delete_release by focusing on the publish action and the special update behavior. The scope is unambiguous.

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 explicitly warns that a tag already carrying a release fails and advises passing if_exists='update' to deliberately overwrite. It also details the consequences of the update path (dropping make_latest and generate_release_notes), giving clear when-to-use and when-to-avoid guidance. No alternative tools are named, but the context is sufficient for the agent to decide between fail and update.

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