fork_repository

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

Disclosures on-chain transaction signing and broadcasting, plus returns fork ID. Without annotations, it conveys key behavioral traits, though it doesn't detail authentication or fees, which are typical for such actions.

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?

Description is very concise, with front-loaded purpose and no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers workflow, required parameters, optional parameters with defaults, return value (fork ID), and behavioral context (on-chain transaction). No output schema needed as return is simple.

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 100%, so each parameter is documented. Description adds defaults and clarifies required vs optional, improving usability beyond schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states the purpose: forking a repository for contribution workflow. Uses specific verb 'fork' and resource 'repository', and contrasts with siblings 'git_clone' and 'create_pull_request' by mentioning the workflow.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'for contribution, fork -> branch -> PR workflow'. Provides alternatives via 'See also...', guiding the agent against misselection.

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