List branches

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds specific behavioral traits: the source repository (Stefan Maron mirror), branch naming conventions, and the default exclusion of meta branches. No contradictions.

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the core purpose, then provide necessary details about branch representation and filtering. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional boolean parameter, no required inputs, clear annotations, and an output schema), the description fully covers the tool's behavior, source, naming, and filtering. No gaps remain.

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?

The sole parameter 'include_meta' has 100% schema coverage. The description adds meaning by explaining what constitutes meta branches (main, base, core, serena) and that default is false. This goes beyond the schema's description.

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 tool lists all branches from a specific mirror, explains what branches represent (localization/version pairs), and gives examples like 'w1-26' and 'fr-27-vNext'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on branches.

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 implies appropriate usage for listing branches and explicitly notes default filtering of meta branches with an option to include them. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but sibling tool names provide context for alternatives.

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