ncloud_sourcecommit_list_repos

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

The description adds that it supports filtering by name and pagination, which is behavioral info beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it does not disclose default behavior, rate limits, or output format. With annotations already indicating read-only, the additional value is modest.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the action and key features. Every word is necessary and no fluff exists. Highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 lacks information about the return value format or what fields are included in the response. Since there is no output schema, the agent is left guessing. A list tool should at least hint at the structure of results.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the description's mention of filtering and pagination merely summarizes. It adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score.

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 the tool lists all SourceCommit repositories, with a specific verb and resource. It mentions filtering and pagination, distinguishing it from sibling tools like ncloud_sourcecommit_get_repo which retrieves a single repository.

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 usage for listing repositories but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_repo or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The context is understood from the tool name but lacks explicit alternatives.

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