treeflow_list_branches

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the only source of behavioral information. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation scoped by tree_id, but it does not disclose return format, ordering, pagination, or any permissions required. This is acceptable but minimal for a simple list tool.

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, compact sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and object, and the parenthetical clarification earns its place by resolving ambiguity about what 'ramas' means.

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?

For a one-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description adequately defines the resource scope and identifies the required input. It does not describe the output shape, but that is a minor gap for such a simple listing operation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents tree_id as 'ID del bot/árbol'. The description adds only a slight contextual hint by referring to 'un bot', but no significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lista') with a clear resource ('ramas... de un bot en Treeflow') and clarifies that branches are canvas flow blocks, which distinguishes it from tree-level and leaf-level tools in the sibling list.

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 makes it clear the tool lists branches for a given bot, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives like treeflow_get_tree_data or treeflow_list_leafs. The usage context is inferable but not directly stated.

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