writ_github_installations

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' and the per-tenant scoping imply a read-only discovery call, and it discloses the returned attributes (id, status, PR-comment bot setting, checkFailUngated), but it says nothing about authentication/permission requirements, pagination, or whether the list can be empty — gaps that matter for an unannotated tool.

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 short paragraphs, front-loaded with the action and ending with the concrete next step. Minor redundancy in enumerating return fields when an output schema already exists, though checkFailUngated is a non-obvious field worth naming.

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 zero-parameter, output-schema-backed discovery tool, the definition covers purpose, returned data, and workflow position. Only the absence of any permission or scope caveat keeps it from being fully complete given the missing annotations.

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 to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no filtering inputs are needed, since tenant scoping is implicit.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List the GitHub App installations for this tenant') and immediately distinguishes itself from the mutating siblings by naming writ_github_set_threshold and writ_github_toggle_pr_comments as the follow-up targets. An agent can tell this is the read/discovery step without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit routing guidance is given: 'Use this to discover installation ids before calling writ_github_set_threshold or writ_github_toggle_pr_comments.' This states the prerequisite relationship and the downstream alternatives, leaving nothing to inference.

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