create_pr

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses auto-generation of title/body from commits and auth requirements. However, it does not mention whether the branch is pushed automatically, what happens on success/failure, or if any user confirmation is needed. This leaves some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences with no unnecessary words. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds key behavioral and prerequisite details. Efficiently front-loaded.

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?

The description covers purpose and a key prerequisite, but lacks information on return value (e.g., does it return a PR URL?), error handling, and whether the branch is pushed. Given no output schema, the description should provide more context on what to expect after invocation.

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 the schema already documents each parameter. The description repeats that title and body can be auto-generated, but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. The phrase 'from the current worktree' could be clearer in relation to the worktreePath parameter.

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 clearly states the verb ('Create') and resource ('GitHub pull request from the current worktree'). It differentiates from sibling worktree management tools by focusing on PR creation and mentions auto-generation of title and body, which specifies its unique behavior.

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 states a prerequisite: 'Requires GitHub authentication (GITHUB_TOKEN env var or gh CLI)'. It provides clear context that this tool is for creating PRs from worktrees, but does not specify when not to use it or list alternative tools for similar tasks.

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