phabricator_branch_search

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description adds nothing on top of that — no pagination behavior, no indication that results are capped at 100, no note that 'closed' is Mercurial-only. For a list tool with filtering parameters, the description could usefully disclose ordering or default limit behavior but does not.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity edges into under-specification rather than optimal 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?

With seven parameters and no output schema, the description is thin, but the 100%-covered schema carries the parameter burden and readOnlyHint covers the safety profile. Missing is any hint of result shape, ordering, or the Mercurial-specific caveat on 'closed', leaving it minimally adequate.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all seven parameters (limit, branch, closed, offset, contains, patterns, repository) are self-documenting in the schema. The description contributes no extra parameter meaning, which is acceptable at this coverage level but earns only the baseline.

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?

Specific verb ('List') plus resource ('branches') scoped to a Diffusion repository, which clearly separates it from sibling searches like phabricator_tag_search or phabricator_commit_search. It stops short of naming those siblings or stating how branch listing differs from repository browsing.

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 when-to-use framing, no exclusions, and no pointer to alternatives such as phabricator_repository_browse or phabricator_tag_search. It only names the resource, leaving all routing decisions to inference from the tool name.

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