bb_delete_branch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a useful non-obvious behavior: refusal to delete the default branch. However, it does not mention the destructive/permanent nature of branch deletion beyond the verb 'Delete', nor any permission or error behavior.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds value, especially the refusal warning.

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 simple 3-parameter delete operation, the description conveys the core action, target resource, and the main edge case (default branch). Minor gaps remain around return or error behavior, but the tool is simple enough that this is not a significant omission.

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 only 33% (only 'branch' has a description), and the description adds little detail about repoSlug or projectKey beyond the phrase 'from a repository'. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate but does not explain parameter formats or relationships.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a branch from a repository'), and adds a distinguishing constraint ('Refuses to delete the default branch'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like bb_list_branches, bb_get_branch, or bb_create_branch.

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?

It states a clear context for use (deleting a branch) and an explicit exclusion (default branch). While it does not name alternatives like bb_create_branch, the refusal warning gives practical guidance on when not to use this tool.

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