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 read-only nature is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond restating the schema's tag_name description (by tag or latest). It does not mention error behavior, rate limits, or authentication, which are not critical for a simple read but are not disclosed either. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It immediately states the action and scope, and the tag/latest distinction is compactly conveyed.

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?

For a simple read tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and mode selection. It does not detail error handling or return format, but the output schema presumably covers that, so this is adequate. A 4 is justified because nothing critical is missing for an agent 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 33% (only tag_name has a description). The description's 'by tag or the latest' duplicates the schema's tag_name description and adds nothing new for repo_owner or repo_name, though those are self-explanatory from their names. Since the schema already explains tag_name, the description adds marginal value but does not fully compensate for the two undocumented parameters.

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 precise resource ('one release'), and clarifies the two modes: by tag or latest. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like github_list_releases (which fetches many) and github_create_release (which writes).

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 when to use it (when you need a single release) but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. For instance, it doesn't say 'use github_list_releases for all releases.' The usage is inferred from the wording 'one release' but lacks explicit routing.

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