uvcs_branch_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety needs no restatement. The description adds value beyond them by disclosing result ordering and the per-branch fields returned, though it omits pagination/truncation behavior (the 50-default cap lives only in the schema).

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?

Two tight sentences; the core action and result shape come first, and the read-only note closes it out. No filler or redundancy.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates the returned fields, and the fully documented parameters cover the input side. The only gap is noting that results are capped/paginated, which matters for a list tool with a 500 max.

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 each of the five parameters documented including the YYYY-MM-DD format and the 1-500 range. The description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource (list branches) and adds concrete detail about ordering ('newest first') and returned fields (owner, parent, head changeset, comment). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the nearby sibling uvcs_branch_info, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Nothing in the text says when to call this rather than uvcs_branch_info or the branch_create tools; the only usage signal is 'Read-only.' The filtering options (owner, since, parent, nameLike) exist only in the schema, so the agent must infer that this is the discovery/filter tool.

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