bitbucket_list_pull_requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that this is a list operation and names state options plus page size, but omits default state, default/max page size, pagination mechanics, ordering, and auth requirements. For a read-only listing tool, this is adequate but incomplete.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and no redundant wording. It could be slightly more structured with parameter defaults, but it is efficient and clear.

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 four-parameter list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and key filters but lacks defaults, pagination details beyond page size, ordering, and expected return shape. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is only 50%, with state and limit undocumented in the schema. The description compensates by naming allowed state values (OPEN/MERGED/DECLINED/ALL) and clarifying that limit means page size, though it does not specify defaults or ranges.

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 'List' and resource 'pull requests in a repository', clearly distinguishable from sibling bitbucket_get_pull_request which retrieves a single PR. It does not explicitly contrast with all siblings, but the purpose is clear.

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?

It indicates optional state and page size filters, implying use for browsing or filtering pull requests, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_pull_request or when-not, and no prerequisites.

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