github_git_delete_ref

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether deletion is destructive, requires specific permissions, or what happens if the ref does not exist. For a delete operation, this lack of transparency is critical.

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 only three words in one sentence. While concise, it is overly minimal and lacks structure. It does not justify its brevity by being informative; it omits essential details that could be added without losing conciseness.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description is very incomplete. It fails to explain what 'reference' means in Git context, how the deletion affects the repository, or what the tool returns. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. However, the schema descriptions are just parameter names ('owner', 'repo', 'ref') with no additional meaning. The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, so no improvement.

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 'Delete a reference' clearly states the verb (delete) and resource (reference), making the action understandable. However, it does not specify what type of reference (e.g., branch or tag) or distinguish it from related tools like github_git_create_ref or github_git_update_ref, which are present among siblings.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when or when not to use this tool. It does not mention alternatives or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from context. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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