Github List Repo Labels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Lists' claim is consistent with that safety profile. However, the description adds little behavioral context beyond the annotations: it does not mention pagination behavior, whether default labels are included, or any other operational characteristics.

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 no redundant words, and the core verb and resource are front-loaded. This is appropriately sized for a simple read-only list tool.

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 and the output schema plus read-only annotations reduce the need for extensive description. However, usage guidance and pagination semantics are absent, so the description is adequate but not complete on its own.

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% (only per_page is described), and the description does not compensate by explaining repo_owner, repo_name, or page. While repo_owner and repo_name are fairly self-explanatory from context, the pagination parameters receive no semantic help from the description, leaving a notable gap.

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 ('Lists') and resource ('labels defined in a repository'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. Among sibling list tools such as github_list_milestones, github_list_tags, and github_list_releases, naming 'labels' unambiguously differentiates this tool.

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 gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. While the name implies its use case, the description itself does not provide any usage direction beyond the basic action.

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