git-merge

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

Description mentions conflict detection but fails to disclose implications like merge commit creation, abort behavior on conflict, or that merge is non-destructive. With no annotations, more behavioral detail needed.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, no redundancy. Could expand slightly without becoming verbose.

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 sibling tools like git-rebase and no output schema, description should clarify when merge is preferred and what conflict detection entails. Lacks enough context for safe usage.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds minimal value beyond 'strategy' enum list; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool merges a branch into the current branch with conflict detection, distinguishing it from siblings like git-rebase or git-cherry-pick.

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?

No guidance on when to use merge versus alternatives (e.g., rebase, cherry-pick) or when not to use it. Lacks context for decision-making.

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