list_branches

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'list branches', which implies read-only, but it does not explicitly state whether it is safe, what it returns, or any potential failure modes. No extra context is added.

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 very concise, consisting of one sentence and an argument list. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool and avoids unnecessary verbosity. However, the structure is a bit docstring-like, but it is not bloated.

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 that the tool is part of a larger branch management set (e.g., create_branch, merge_branches), the description lacks context about what branches are in this project domain, when to list them, or how this fits with other operations. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but the description is too minimal to be helpful for an agent deciding among siblings.

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 description must compensate. It mentions 'project_uuid: UUID of the project', which adds a small amount of meaning beyond the schema's 'Project Uuid' title, but it is essentially redundant and lacks any deeper explanation of the parameter's usage or format.

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 'Get a list of project branches', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_branch, fork_branch, and merge_branches by indicating a list operation, though it does not explicitly contrast with other list tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not describe any prerequisites, exclusions, or context in which listing branches would be appropriate compared to other branch-related operations.

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