github_get_branch

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions routing through `/api/tools/invoke` under JWT/tenant/company scope, which adds minimal context, but it fails to indicate whether the operation is read-only or destructive, or what side effects occur.

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?

Although short, the description is not concise in a helpful way—it includes a routing detail that is likely redundant or low-value, and lacks essential information. The structure does not front-load the core purpose.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., branch details). For a simple wrapper, the description is extremely incomplete, leaving the agent unable to determine the tool's effect or output.

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?

The only parameter `arguments` is described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation'—this adds no meaningful detail beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not explain expected JSON keys or structure.

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 says 'Github connector operation `get_branch`' which is essentially a tautology—it restates the tool name without specifying what the operation does. It does not distinguish this tool from related siblings like `github_list_branches` or `github_get_branch_protection`.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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