git_branches

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It reveals execution timing behavior (timeout handling, on_timeout options) but does not disclose whether the tool performs reading, writing, or any destructive actions. Key behavioral aspects are missing.

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 not concise; it dedicates most content to generic timing instructions that could be shared across tools. The core purpose is missing, and the structure is unfocused.

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 says nothing about return values. For a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete, failing to provide context for safe and effective use.

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 explains several timing parameters (expected_runtime_seconds, timeout_seconds, etc.) but omits path and all_branches. Coverage is partial, leaving critical parameters undefined.

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 fails to state what the tool does beyond the name 'git_branches'. It focuses entirely on execution timing, leaving the core purpose unclear. The name suggests listing branches, but the description does not confirm this.

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 git_checkout, git_log, or other git-related sibling tools. The description only discusses timing parameter selection.

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