list_user_following

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the structure of returned objects and pagination parameters, which adds meaningful context beyond the schema. It doesn't cover rate limits or errors, but those are not essential for this simple read operation.

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 that immediately state the purpose, followed by output details and a docs link. No wasted words.

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 straightforward list endpoint, the description covers purpose, return format, and pagination. The presence of a docs link and the clear output structure make it complete despite no annotations or output schema.

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% (only username has a description), but the description explicitly mentions `page` and `per_page` for pagination, adding meaning to the two previously undocumented parameters. This fully compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 the verb 'List' and specifies the resource as 'the users that a given GitHub user follows,' clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'list_user_followers.' It also mentions the return type, reinforcing its function.

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?

It states exactly what it returns and how to paginate, giving clear context for when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives like 'list_user_followers' or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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