list_labels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It only states 'list,' implying read-only, but omits behavioral details such as pagination behavior, default ordering, or whether the tool returns all labels by default. The schema includes pagination parameters, but the description adds no context about how they work.

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?

The description is a single sentence of 4 words, which is concise but lacking in substance. While brevity is valued, it could include a brief note on functionality without becoming verbose.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about the tool's behavior. It fails to explain common aspects like pagination defaults, whether results are sorted, or what happens when no parameters are provided. The tool has 5 parameters, and the description is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the 5 parameters. It merely restates the operation.

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 'List labels for a GitLab project' clearly specifies the action (list) and resource (labels for a GitLab project), distinguishing it from mutating siblings like create_label or update_label. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools (e.g., list_issues), though the resource is distinct.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. Sibling tools like list_issues, list_milestones, or create_label exist, but no context is given for when listing labels is appropriate or when not to use it.

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