azure_create_pull_request

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action of creating a pull request, without mentioning side effects, permissions, or any operational characteristics. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior beyond the verb 'create'.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately short, though it lacks substantive content. The structure is efficient, but the sentence's tautological nature prevents a higher score.

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 create operation with 5 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain the action's prerequisites, effects, or return values, leaving significant gaps in context that a more thorough description should fill.

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%, with all five parameters having clear descriptions. The tool description itself adds no parameter information, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameters thoroughly, making additional description unnecessary.

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 'Cria um novo Pull Request' translates directly to 'Creates a new Pull Request', which merely restates the tool name 'azure_create_pull_request'. It is a tautology, providing no new information about the tool's scope or distinguishing capabilities beyond the name itself.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without any decision support for selecting this tool among the many sibling create tools.

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