devops_repository_get

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

The description is consistent with the 'readOnlyHint' annotation, indicating a read-only operation. However, it adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide (e.g., permissions, rate limits, or error scenarios), so it meets the minimum bar but does not exceed.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the core purpose efficiently. Every word is meaningful, and the key identifier (by name or ID) is front-loaded. No unnecessary elaboration.

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 that an output schema exists (context signals indicate true), the description does not need to detail return values. The single parameter is fully described in both schema and description. For a simple retrieval tool, the description adequately covers the essential information, though it could optionally mention that the operation is immediate or idempotent.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the parameter 'repository_id' is well-documented in the schema as 'Repository name or ID.' The description essentially repeats this without adding new meaning (e.g., format constraints, examples, or behavior for invalid IDs). Thus baseline score of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'repository details', and specifies the lookup key ('by repository name or ID'). It distinguishes from sibling 'devops_repository_list' which lists all repositories, but does not explicitly mention this distinction.

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 implies when to use (when you need details for one repository), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., for listing all repositories) and no alternatives are mentioned. The agent must infer usage from context.

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