github_git_get_tree

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention that this is a read-only operation, whether authentication is required, or any other side effects. The schema's recursive parameter description provides some behavior, but the tool description itself lacks transparency.

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 very short (one phrase), which is concise but at the cost of completeness. It is not appropriately sized for a tool with 4 parameters and a distinct purpose. Every sentence should add value, and this description adds minimal value.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain what the tool returns (the tree data structure). It fails to do so. The description is incomplete given the complexity of the GitHub Git Tree API and the presence of many sibling tools.

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 schema already explains each parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a tree' is a minimal statement of the tool's action and resource. It clearly indicates the tool retrieves a tree object, but it is vague for agents unfamiliar with Git data model. It does not explicitly say it's a Git tree object, and it borders on tautological with the name.

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 usage guidelines are provided. There is no mention of when to use this tool versus siblings like github_git_get_blob or github_git_get_commit. The description gives no context for selection.

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