git_stash

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'dirty working directory' but does not elaborate on other behavioral traits (e.g., that stashing reverts working directory changes, creates a stash entry). It is adequate but not rich.

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 description is a single, concise sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded and to the point, though it lacks any structural organization.

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 git stash tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description only provides the basic action. It does not explain the effect on the working directory, how to retrieve the stash later, or any caveats, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add any additional context beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for a fully described schema.

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 action: stash changes in a dirty working directory, using the git stash command. It is distinct from sibling tools like git_add_or_commit or git_checkout, though it doesn't elaborate on the meaning of 'stash'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use stashing versus alternatives (e.g., committing, discarding). The description does not mention when not to use or provide any context for decision-making.

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