git_create_branch

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It omits core side effects (e.g., does it create local branch, push to remote?). Instead, it details timing parameters that are likely generic across tools, failing to disclose actual git creation behavior.

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?

Description is short but wastes space on irrelevant timing details while missing the primary purpose. It is not concise in delivering necessary information; each sentence does not earn its place.

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?

With 9 parameters, no parameter descriptions, and no output schema explanation, the description is severely incomplete. A tool of this complexity requires clear parameter definitions and behavioral context, which are entirely absent.

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 coverage is 0%, and description provides no explanation for any parameter. Essential parameters like path, branch, start_point, and checkout are not defined, leaving the agent unable to understand their purpose 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?

Description focuses on execution timing mechanics rather than stating that the tool creates a git branch. It does not clarify what the tool does, making it vague and indistinguishable from sibling tools like git_checkout or git_branches.

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 on when to use this tool compared to alternatives. It only discusses timing strategies for execution, ignoring context such as when branch creation is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.

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