sync_to_github

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the tool pushes markdown files and implies git commits via the commit_message parameter, but does not mention authentication requirements, overwrite semantics, or error handling. More detail is needed for full transparency.

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 two concise paragraphs with no fluff. The first paragraph states purpose and usage timing; the second details parameters. Minor redundancy (first two sentences cover similar ground) keeps it from a 5.

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 moderate complexity (4 params, dependency on other tool outputs) and the existence of an output schema, the description provides a complete usage flow and parameter explanations. It lacks return value details, but the output schema fills that gap.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries full burden and succeeds. It defines 'analyses' as results from analyse_video/batch_analyse, explains 'image_paths' structure, and ties 'x_digests' to analyse_x_feed. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 specific verbs ('Push', 'Sync') and explicitly states it stores analysis results to a GitHub repo. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools that analyse or generate content.

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 explicitly says 'Use after analyse_video, analyse_x_feed, or generate_image to persist results', providing clear when-to-use guidance and naming alternative actions.

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