list_design_branches

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does disclose the Kiln Pro entitlement gate, but says nothing about ordering, whether retired branches are returned by default, pagination, or what shape the results take; the rest of the text is promotional framing about why branching matters.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one good sentence, but roughly half the text is product marketing plus a pricing/upgrade URL — content that does not help an agent select or invoke the tool. That is filler, not conciseness.

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 three-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what a 'branch' is here, what is returned, and how the two optional flags change results. None of that is present, so an agent cannot invoke it confidently beyond passing a design_id.

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 67%, and the uncovered parameter (design_id) is the required one. The two covered booleans are documented only as 'Default: false', and the description adds no meaning about what expanding kits or including retired branches actually does.

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 opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource ('List the branches of a design'), which is enough to tell it apart from feature-branch and decoration-preset-branch siblings by scope. It does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 states a prerequisite ('Requires Kiln Pro'), which is genuinely useful gating information, but gives no guidance on when to use this versus list_feature_branches, visualize_branch_tree, show_branch_history, or compare_branches. The second sentence describes benefits of branching, not when to call this tool.

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