sandbox_git_init

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It correctly implies the action is non-destructive (initializing a repo doesn't destroy data), but does not mention if it overwrites existing git repositories, requires specific permissions, or has side effects. The transparency is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the key action. It could be slightly improved by removing redundancy (e.g., 'directory' is implied by 'sandbox'), but 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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. It states the core function, but lacks context on error states (e.g., if the path already contains a git repo), which would be helpful for an agent.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters ('sandboxId' and 'path'), so coverage is 100%. The description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema states, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action ('Initialize a new git repository') and the context ('in a sandbox directory'), providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling git tools like sandbox_git_clone or sandbox_git_branch, missing an opportunity to clarify that this is for creating a fresh repository, not cloning or branching.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sandbox_git_clone. It does not specify prerequisites (e.g., whether the sandbox must be running) or mention that the path should be empty or non-existing. An agent would need to infer usage from context.

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