list_releases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It says 'published' releases, which implies a filter, but does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, return shape, or what 'published' excludes. For a read-only list with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

A single efficient sentence with no waste. The key scope constraint ('published') is front-loaded and the resource is named immediately.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, three required parameters (two undocumented), and no pagination or return-format guidance, the description is insufficient for an agent to call this tool confidently. It should explain what pagination looks like and what a 'published release' includes.

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 33%. project_id is documented in the schema with format details, but page and per_page have no descriptions in either schema or description. The description does not compensate for this gap by explaining pagination semantics. Baseline 3 reflects that the schema does partial work, but the description adds nothing.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (published project releases and version changelogs). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_release (singular fetch) and create_release (mutation). It could be sharper about scope (e.g., published only vs. all), 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?

No indication of when to use this versus get_release or create_release. The word 'published' hints at a filter but no exclusions or alternatives are named, leaving the agent to infer usage from the sibling list alone.

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