Search GitHub Repositories

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

Annotations already define it as a safe, read-only operation. The description adds valuable context like sorting options and the vast corpus size (86K+ MCP repos, 372M+ total), enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences front-loaded with purpose, followed by return fields and sort/scale info. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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 search criteria, return fields, sort options, and scale. Combined with rich annotations and full schema coverage, it is complete for a search tool.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline 3. The description adds meaning by noting that query can include qualifiers like 'language:python stars:>1000', which the schema does not specify, improving parameter understanding.

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 specifies the tool searches GitHub repositories by keyword, language, stars, topics, and lists return fields and sort options. It distinguishes from sibling tools like developer.github.repo and developer.github.user by focusing on search.

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 as a search tool, but no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like developer.github.repo for single repo details. The description doesn't state when not to use this tool.

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