axon_pro_list_repos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does convey the basics: 'List' implies a non-mutating read and 'with their stats' hints at the payload. It does not disclose pagination, ordering, or scope limits (e.g. whether only repos visible to the caller are returned).

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 minimal zero-param read tool this is close to sufficient, but with no output schema the description should say more about what 'stats' includes and whether the list is complete or limited, since the agent cannot fall back on structured return documentation.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. No parameter semantics are required or missing.

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 and resource ('List all indexed repositories') plus the returned payload ('their stats'). None of the siblings (query, impact, cypher, dead_code, etc.) do repository enumeration, so the tool is easy to tell apart, though the description never explicitly names that distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied: a zero-parameter listing tool is obviously a discovery/entry point, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites, and no pointer to a follow-up tool such as axon_pro_query or axon_pro_architecture.

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