github_repos_get_branch_protection

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

No annotations are available, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It merely states 'get' without confirming whether it is a read-only operation, what data it returns, or any side effects. The description fails to convey transparency for a safe read operation.

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 only three words, the description is extremely concise but lacks structure and substance. It does not include any structured information such as bullet points or sections, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool.

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 that there is no output schema and the tool has three required parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value structure, authentication requirements, or any prerequisites, leaving significant gaps 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?

The input schema covers all parameters (owner, repo, branch) with 100% description coverage, but the descriptions are minimal (just the parameter names). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, remaining at the baseline score of 3.

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 branch protection' clearly identifies the action (get) and resource (branch protection), but it lacks any additional context about what branch protection entails. It is minimally viable but does not distinguish itself from related tools like update or delete branch protection.

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 update_branch_protection or get_branch. The description does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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