create_project_branch

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that email is sandboxed/off and cron is off unless enabled. However, it does not mention other critical behaviors such as whether the operation is destructive, cost implications, permission requirements, or side effects on the parent project.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every word adds value; no redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite 6 parameters and no output schema, the description omits what the tool returns (likely a branch identifier or status). It also lacks prerequisites (e.g., parent project must exist) and does not mention that a snapshot may be created if not provided.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description restates defaults (email off/cron off) which are already in schema. It adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema's parameter descriptions provide.

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 action 'Create' and resource 'contained branch project'. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'from a fresh or existing snapshot' and specifying email/cron containment. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar creation tools like 'create_project_snapshot'.

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?

Description implies usage for creating a contained branch with sandboxed email and disabled cron, but lacks explicit guidance on when NOT to use this tool or when to prefer alternatives. No exclusions or context comparing with sibling tools.

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