git_git_list_branches

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it lists branches (a read operation), but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like performance, authentication needs, or scope limits (e.g., that it only lists local, not remote branches). Acceptable for a simple 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?

The description is a single sentence with no extraneous information, fully front-loaded with the key action and scope.

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 an output schema (presumably listing branches) and no parameters, the description is complete. It specifies the repository (HA config repo) and the type of branches (local), leaving no ambiguity about what the tool returns.

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 zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. According to the rubric, baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 clearly states the tool lists all local branches in the HA config repo, using a specific verb (list) and resource (branches in HA config repo). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like git_git_checkout_branch or git_git_create_branch.

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 implies usage for listing local branches; since it's a simple list operation with no parameters, context is clear. No explicit when-not or alternatives are mentioned, but the sibling tools are distinct actions, so the purpose is sufficiently differentiated.

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