Github Get Release

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds the specific selection behavior (by tag or latest) and the fact it fetches exactly one release, which goes beyond the generic read-only hint. It does not mention side effects, but there are none per annotations. The description enriches the behavioral context without contradicting the annotations.

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 sentence with the core behavior front-loaded, followed by a separate line pointing to a skill. There is zero fluff. It is perfectly concise and structured for quick parsing by an agent.

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 a simple fetch operation with an output schema (present but not shown) and annotations covering safety. The description covers the selection logic and the required parameters implicitly through the schema. It does not mention edge cases like tag-not-found, but for a straightforward read operation with an output schema, this is sufficient. The workflow hint adds extra context. Overall, the agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 33% (only tag_name has a description). The tool description clarifies the tag_name parameter by saying 'by tag or the latest published one', which maps directly to the omit-for-latest behavior. However, it gives no additional meaning for repo_owner and repo_name, which are standard parameters but remain undocumented in the schema. The description partially compensates for the low coverage but not fully; it focuses on the optional parameter while leaving required ones self-explanatory.

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 'Fetches' and a specific resource 'one release', and explicitly defines the selection criterion 'by tag or the latest published one'. This clearly distinguishes it from github_list_releases which fetches multiple releases, and from github_create_release which writes. The purpose is unambiguous and differentiates from siblings.

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 implies usage for fetching a single release, contrasting with a list operation. It also includes a workflow hint 'github_get_skill('release-management')' which signals that the agent should retrieve a skill for workflow context. While not explicitly stating when not to use it (e.g., use list for multiple releases), the 'one' versus 'latest' language gives a clear contextual cue, and the skill pointer provides additional guidance. There is no explicit alternative named, but the intent is clear enough.

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