github_git_create_ref

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose behavioral details like required permissions, error conditions (e.g., ref already exists), or what side effects occur. The agent is left uninformed.

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?

At three words, the description is overly terse. While concise, it sacrifices necessary detail, failing to earn its place with valuable information.

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 the tool has three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It omits the type of reference, required body fields, return value, and usage context, making it nearly unusable for an agent.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, parameter descriptions are merely the names ('owner', 'repo', 'Request body (JSON object)'). The description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, and the 'body' parameter remains opaque with no defined structure.

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 'Create a reference' indicates a verb and resource, but it is vague. It does not specify whether it creates a branch, tag, or other type of reference, and does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'github_git_create_tag'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'github_git_create_tag' or 'github_git_update_ref'. The agent receives no context to decide appropriately.

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