Github List Releases

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the ordering behavior ('newest first') but does not disclose pagination details, rate limits, or other runtime traits. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence about the workflow skill is short but may add procedural noise; still, there is no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only list operation with an output schema, the core semantics are present and the ordering is specified. However, it lacks explicit sibling differentiation and leaves required parameters undocumented, making it minimally adequate rather than fully self-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 description coverage is only 25%, with repo_owner, repo_name, and page undocumented in the schema. The description does not explain these parameters beyond saying 'a repository's releases,' which only weakly implies the need for owner and name. This does not compensate for the low schema 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 action and resource: 'Lists a repository's releases, newest first.' This makes the listing intent and ordering clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like github_get_release or github_list_tags, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The line 'Workflow and conventions: github_get_skill("release-management")' is a procedural convention, not a comparison or exclusion. An agent must infer usage from the tool name and generic listing behavior.

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