List Branches

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

Description discloses that data is fetched live from GitHub, that results are empty for non-Git sources, and defines the 'current' field. This goes beyond the read-only annotation by explaining actual behavior, though it omits potential network delay or authentication requirements.

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 extremely concise and to the point, with no redundant phrases. It conveys the essential behavior in two short sentences.

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?

The description includes a useful edge case (empty for non-Git) and defines 'current', but lacks parameter details and any indication of response format. For a simple read-only tool this is acceptable, but not fully complete.

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?

The description does not explain any of the four parameters (workspaceSlug, appSlug, env, region) beyond their implicit names. Since the schema covers them but the description adds no clarification, the semantic value is minimal.

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?

Description clearly indicates the tool fetches live data from GitHub and explains the meaning of 'current' in relation to the deployed branch. It is specific enough to distinguish from generic Git tools, though it could more explicitly state that it returns a list of branches.

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?

Provides context about when results may be empty (non-Git sources) and that data is fetched live. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over related alternatives like getGitOverview or inspectSource.

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