Push multiple files

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation and delete risk profile is covered structurally, and the description's mention of 'delete' is consistent with it. The 'single commit' phrasing adds useful atomicity context, but nothing is said about permissions, partial failure, or what deleting via sha entails.

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?

One sentence, correctly front-loaded with the verb set and resource, with zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity shades into under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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 6-parameter destructive batch mutation with only 33% schema coverage and no output schema, one sentence is inadequate. Missing are the branch/new_branch semantics, whether deletes are recoverable, and any indication of how per-file success or failure is reported.

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%, yet the description adds no parameter meaning at all. It never mentions the sha requirement for update/delete, the operation enum, branch, message, or new_branch — precisely the fields whose semantics an agent needs before constructing a multi-file commit.

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?

States a specific verb set (create, update, delete), the resource (files), and the scope (several files in a single commit). The 'several files in a single commit' phrasing implicitly separates it from the single-file siblings create_or_update_file and delete_file, though it never names them.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no named alternatives. The agent must infer from the title and siblings that this is the batch variant of create_or_update_file/delete_file; nothing tells it when to prefer one call over multiple single-file calls.

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