Github Create Tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating a write operation. The description adds the annotated vs lightweight distinction, which is a meaningful behavioral nuance. However, it does not mention side effects, failure conditions (e.g., tag already exists), or permission requirements. Given annotations cover the mutation aspect, the extra value is limited but real.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Creates a new tag') and then explains the key behavioral distinction. No fluff, every word 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?

The tool is simple, has an output schema (so return format is documented), and annotations cover the mutation nature. The description captures the essential tag behavior (annotated vs lightweight). It does not mention prerequisites like repo existence or tag uniqueness, but for a straightforward creation tool, this is 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 only 20% (only sha has a description). The description explains the message parameter's effect (annotated vs lightweight), adding meaning beyond the bare type. It does not explain repo_owner, repo_name, or tag_name, but those are self-evident from their names. It partially compensates for the low schema coverage but leaves room for more.

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 and resource: 'Creates a new tag.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like github_list_tags (listing) and github_delete_tag (deletion), and from github_create_release (release vs tag). The scope is clear.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that creating a release (github_create_release) might be more appropriate for distributable artifacts, or that a lightweight tag is for simple refs. The agent gets no decision support.

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