GitHub CI status

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful side effect (the result is rendered on the Bar unless show=false), but says nothing about authentication needs, rate limits, failure/error behavior, or what the run information contains.

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 compact sentences with the core resource stated first and the display condition second. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 and no output schema, the description should say more about what a 'run' report includes (status, conclusion, link) and any auth prerequisites. It covers the parameters adequately but leaves the return shape and operational requirements unaddressed.

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 33%, yet the description compensates well: it clarifies that branch is optional and defaults to the default branch, and that show=false suppresses display. The repo parameter is only implied via the owner/name pattern in the schema, which is a minor gap.

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 names a specific resource and scope: the latest GitHub Actions run for a repo branch, defaulting to the default branch. It is clearly distinct from siblings like github_inbox or the bar_* display tools, though it uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb (fetch/show).

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 implied — check CI status for a repo — and the 'unless show=false' clause hints at the display behavior, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as github_inbox for other GitHub data.

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