annotate_feature_branch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that Kiln Pro is required, but says nothing about whether setting the annotation overwrites an existing one, what permissions are needed, whether the operation is reversible, or what the response looks like.

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 first sentence is concise and front-loaded. The remaining sentences are an unrelated marketing upsell listing calibration, mid-print edits, and textures, none of which help an agent invoke this tool.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, the description supplies the basic purpose and a licensing prerequisite, but omits branch-type scope, parameter constraints, and mutation semantics. The promotional text competes with the operational information instead of completing it.

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%, so the description must compensate. It loosely maps annotation to a 'human-readable purpose string' and branch_id to a 'branch,' but provides no branch ID format, annotation length or character constraints, or validation rules.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource: setting a human-readable purpose string on a branch. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish this from sibling annotation tools such as annotate_design_branch or annotate_decoration_preset_branch.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any conditions beyond the Kiln Pro requirement. It does not explain which branch types are valid or when annotation is appropriate.

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