gitee_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. The description and schema do mention that 'repos' requires GITEE_TOKEN and returns an actionable error otherwise, which is good. However, it doesn't fully disclose all behavioral traits, such as rate limiting or idempotency, which would be beneficial for a search tool.

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 extremely concise with one sentence for the purpose and a succinct rationale for the design. The examples section provides immediate, actionable examples without extra fluff. Every part of the description 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 description, combined with the schema and output schema, provides a pretty complete picture. The rationale section adds helpful context. It could be slightly improved by mentioning if there are any rate limits or request limits for the operations. Also, the response format is documented in examples but not in the description text itself.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 100%, the schema already documents all parameters. The description in the schema for 'operation' provides extra context not in the JSON schema itself, such as 'works anonymously', 'requires GITEE_TOKEN'. This adds value for the agent.

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 clearly states it searches Gitee users and repositories or lists a user's public repos. The operation discriminator helps distinguish between three distinct sub-purposes, effectively combining multiple related operations into one tool. This makes the purpose specific and well-differentiated.

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 and input schema together provide clear guidelines on when to use each operation. The operation parameter's enum values and descriptions clarify which operation fits which scenario. However, there is no explicit 'when not to use' guidance or alternatives mentioned, slightly reducing the score.

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