create_commit_status

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

The description claims 'create or update' but provides no details on idempotency, overwrite behavior, permissions required, or rate limits. With only an openWorldHint annotation, the description carries the burden and fails to disclose these traits.

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 highly concise sentence (8 words) that covers the core action. While not verbose, it could benefit from a bit more context without becoming wasteful.

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 10 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the 'update' mechanism (e.g., based on sha+name), nor hint at the return value. A tool with this complexity requires more detail for an AI agent to use correctly.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score.

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 specifically states 'Create or update the status of a commit', which is a clear action on a specific resource. Among siblings, 'list_commit_statuses' exists but is distinct, so this tool is well-differentiated.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to create vs update, or when listing is more appropriate). The description omits any context about prerequisites or optimal usage.

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