Contract Testing: List Branches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the facts about filtering and pagination, but does not disclose behaviors such as default page size implications, sort order, or how to retrieve all items beyond the first page. This is minor added value beyond annotations.

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 main description is front-loaded in a single clear sentence, and the parameter list is compact. The Toolset line is short. The parameter block is redundant with the schema but not excessively verbose, so overall it is efficient.

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?

Given the simple schema and safety annotations, the description is mostly adequate for a list operation. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not explain what a branch object contains or how pagination works in practice, which an agent may need to know to fully consume the results.

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%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description repeats the parameter list almost verbatim without adding further semantic value or clarifying edge cases, so it stays at the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and a specific resource ('all branches for a given pacticipant'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_branch, get_branch_versions, and list_pacticipants. It also mentions optional filtering and pagination, further clarifying the exact operation.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving all branches of a pacticipant, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives such as get_branch or get_branch_versions, nor does it mention any exclusions or absence of filtering capabilities.

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