get_branch

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

No annotations provided, but description clearly labels it as 'Read-only' and details the return fields. Lacks mention of error states or rate limits, but for a simple read operation, this is sufficient.

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?

Four concise sentences, each adding value: purpose, return contents, usage context, and prerequisite. No wasted words.

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?

Without an output schema, the description fully explains the output fields. It covers purpose, usage, output, and prerequisite. Complete for a simple one-parameter read tool.

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?

Parameter 'branchId' is fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond advising to get it from list_branches, which is contextual rather than semantic.

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 tool retrieves a specific branch's metadata and full thought history, specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_branches (which only lists branches) and get_thought (single thought).

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use to deeply inspect a branch's reasoning before deciding to merge, close, or continue it.' Also provides a prerequisite: 'Use list_branches first to get the branch ID.'

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