approve_merge_request

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

The description discloses the critical dry_run behavior (default true), which is beyond the annotation. However, it does not mention other behavioral traits such as required permissions, idempotency, or side effects upon actual approval.

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 sentences, front-loaded, no wasted words. Efficient and to the point.

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 covers the core action and the important dry_run flag, but lacks context about return values (no output schema) and prerequisites (e.g., permissions). Adequate for a simple tool, but could be more 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema parameter descriptions; it only restates the dry_run default. No additional value.

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 verb 'Approve' and the resource 'merge request'. It also mentions the dry_run default, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'merge_merge_request'. However, it could be more explicit about differentiating approval from merging.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention when-not to use it or provide context like 'requires MR to be open' or 'use this to add approval, not to merge'. The dry_run mention implies a workflow, but no direct comparison to siblings.

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