contentrain_branch_list

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond the annotations: it lists merge status, and provides health-limit thresholds (warning at 50, blocked at 80 unmerged). Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and the description complements them without contradiction.

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?

Two sentences front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage guidance. Every sentence is informative and necessary, with 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and full annotation coverage, the description provides sufficient context: what is listed (branches with merge status), thresholds, and how to use it. It does not need to explain return values as the description implies the output.

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 coverage is 100% (one parameter with description). The description does not add extra semantics beyond the schema for the parameter 'unmerged_only'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the parameter is well-documented 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?

Description clearly states the action (list), the specific resource (contentrain (cr/*) branches), and the information provided (merge status against contentrain branch). It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning its role in discovering branch names for merge/delete operations.

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 tells when to use: to discover branch names for specific tools (contentrain_merge, contentrain_branch_delete) and to monitor branch-health limits with specific thresholds (warning at 50, blocked at 80 unmerged). This guides the agent on appropriate context.

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