code_workspace_pull_request

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Open a GitHub pull request' without explaining side effects (e.g., whether it pushes the branch, updates existing PRs, or requires a remote). The default body '{}' is unexplained and potentially confusing.

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 short sentence, which is concise but borders on under-specification. It is not verbose, but it could be improved with additional context without becoming overly long.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is too brief. It omits important details about the behavior and prerequisites (e.g., whether the workspace must have a remote branch configured). The overall completeness for a mutation tool is inadequate.

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%, yet the description adds no explanation for either parameter. 'workspace_id' is not described, and 'body' with default '{}' is left entirely to the agent's interpretation. The description fails to compensate for the missing schema parameter descriptions.

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 action ('Open'), the resource ('a GitHub pull request'), and the context ('from the workspace branch'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like github_create_pull_request by specifying the workspace branch origin.

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 like github_create_pull_request or other code_workspace tools. The description does not include when-not to use it or any prerequisites.

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