create_repo_issue

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It reveals it creates an issue and returns a URL and issue ID, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or rate limits. It is adequate but not richly transparent.

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 concise with a clear purpose statement followed by an Args list and Returns. It is front-loaded with the main action. A slightly more structured format or removal of repetitive schema info could make it more efficient.

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?

Covers the main purpose, required parameters, and return values. However, it lacks context on error handling, authentication, prerequisites, and how the tool fits with siblings. For a creation tool, this is sufficient but not comprehensive.

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 50%, so the description should compensate. It repeats the schema's parameter descriptions (e.g., repo format, optional body/labels) without adding significant new meaning or usage context beyond what is already in the schema.

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 'create an issue on a repository,' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like delete_repo_issue, list_repo_issues, and update_repo_issue by focusing on creation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied by the name and description, but there are no exclusions or context-specific recommendations.

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