list_user_followers

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

Even without annotations, the description discloses key behavior: returns an array of simple-user objects with specific fields and supports pagination via page and per_page. It lacks auth/error details but is reasonably transparent for a read-only list endpoint.

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 provide purpose, return shape, pagination guidance, and a documentation link. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the simple nature and lack of output schema, the description supplies the essential return structure and pagination. It could mention 404 behavior or auth requirements but is otherwise complete for a basic GitHub API list operation.

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% (username only). The description adds meaning by explaining that page and per_page control pagination, and username is clarified in the schema. However, it doesn't elaborate on defaults/limits beyond what the schema already shows, so it only partially compensates.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('users who follow a given GitHub user'), clearly distinguishing this from siblings like list_user_following by stating direction (followers vs. following). It also mentions the return type, leaving no ambiguity.

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?

The context is clear: list followers for a specified username. It mentions pagination but does not explicitly say when not to use it or point to alternatives. This is a clear usage context without exclusions.

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