approve_merge_request

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

Beyond the openWorldHint annotation, the description adds no behavioral context. It does not mention side effects, authentication requirements (e.g., the password parameter implies re-authentication), or confirmation of approval.

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?

Extremely concise (3 words), but it is essentially a tautology of the tool name. While not verbose, it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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 low complexity and no output schema, the description is just adequate. It lacks context on what the approval entails, any changes to the MR state, or return values.

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 100%, and the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states the action (approve) and resource (merge request), but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'merge_merge_request' or 'unapprove_merge_request'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., merge_merge_request). No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for proper use.

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