worktree_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states it is a listing operation and names the output fields, but does not explicitly confirm that it is read-only, behavior on invalid repo_path, or whether it includes the main worktree. These are minor gaps for a simple list command.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no redundant or filler content.

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 one-parameter listing tool, the description covers the action, the resource, and the returned fields, which is most of what an agent needs. It stops short of stating preconditions (valid repo path) and error behavior, but these are minor for this operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the lone repo_path parameter. The phrase 'de un repo' ties the parameter to the repository but does not specify the expected format (absolute/relative path, git URL) or constraints. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description adds minimal semantic value.

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 ('Lista') and identifies a clear resource ('worktrees activos de un repo'), with parenthetical detail on the returned fields (paths, branch, HEAD). This differentiates it from sibling tools like worktree_create and worktree_remove.

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 usage: call it when you need to inspect active worktrees in a repo. However, it offers no explicit comparison or exclusion against sibling tools, so routing is left to inference.

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