git-mcp-server

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

The description confirms mutability ('save', 'remove') consistent with readOnlyHint:false, but fails to disclose that 'drop' and 'clear' are destructive/irreversible, or that 'pop' removes the stash while 'apply' preserves it. Additional behavioral traits like conflict handling are absent.

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?

Single, dense sentence efficiently conveys all primary operations without redundancy. Well-structured with the high-level action 'Manage stashes' front-loaded, followed by colon-separated specific capabilities.

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?

Sufficient given the rich schema (100% coverage) and presence of an output schema, but lacks important warnings about destructive operations (drop/clear) and nuanced distinctions between similar modes (pop vs apply) that would help an agent avoid data loss.

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 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description elevates this by conceptually grouping the six mode enum values into four user-intent categories (list/save/restore/remove), which helps agents understand the purpose of the mode parameter beyond the technical schema definition.

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 states a specific verb ('Manage') and resource ('stashes'), then enumerates exact capabilities (list, save, restore, remove). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing exclusively on stash operations rather than branching, committing, or other git workflows.

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?

While it maps operation modes to concepts (save/restore/remove), it lacks explicit guidance on when to use 'pop' versus 'apply', or when stashing is preferable to committing or resetting. No prerequisites (e.g., requiring uncommitted changes for push) are mentioned.

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