github_git_update_ref

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

No annotations provided and description only says 'update', implying mutation. No disclosure of what fields are updated, force-push behavior, error conditions, or side effects beyond the minimal verb.

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 a single sentence with no fluff, but it is overly terse and lacks structure. It could be expanded 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 complexity (4 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly insufficient. It does not explain the body parameter, return value, or how the reference update works.

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% but with minimal descriptions ('owner', 'repo', 'ref', 'Request body (JSON object)'). The tool description adds no extra meaning to parameters.

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 'Update a reference' is a tautology that restates the tool's name without adding specificity. It differentiates from siblings (create/delete/get) but fails to clarify what type of reference (branch, tag) or scope.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_ref or delete_ref. Missing context such as prerequisites (push access) or typical use cases.

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