github_merge_pr

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 fails to mention that merging is irreversible, requires write permissions, or may fail due to conflicts. Only a bare action and parameter list are given.

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 summary followed by a concise parameter list. Every line provides necessary information, and there is no redundant or extraneous text.

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 mutating, potentially irreversible operation, the description is minimal. It omits preconditions, side effects, and permission requirements. The presence of an output schema somewhat reduces the need to explain return values, but the description still lacks enough context for safe invocation.

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 0%, so the tool description is the only source of parameter meaning. It adds valuable semantics beyond the schema: merge_method enum options ('merge', 'squash', 'rebase'), default behavior for empty commit_title/commit_message, and clarifies that pr_number is the PR to merge.

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 'Merge a pull request' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like create_pr, update_pr, and close_pr. It is unambiguous and immediately conveys the tool's function.

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 (e.g., close_pr) or any preconditions like PR must be open and mergeable. The description is purely a command with no contextual usage hints.

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