git_worktree_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral load. It discloses that the output includes path, branch, commit, and dirty status, and mandates that hints be displayed. But it doesn't mention whether this is read-only (implied by 'list' but not stated), pagination, or handling of missing repos.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then alternative, then output and mandatory hint behavior. The 'IMPORTANT' note is clear but slightly verbose; could be more concise, but no wasted words.

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 listing tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, output fields, and post-call actions. It doesn't detail error cases or how repoPath defaults (schema covers that), but overall sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The single parameter repoPath has 100% schema description coverage. The description doesn't add parameter details, but with one optional parameter already fully explained in the schema, the baseline is high. No additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 (List) and resource (git worktrees) and explicitly distinguishes itself from the shell command 'git worktree list' and from sibling tools like hop_list. An agent can immediately tell what this does.

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?

Explicitly says to use this instead of the git command, and the 'IMPORTANT' note gives post-invocation guidance about displaying hints for options (hop to, hop open, hop start). However, it doesn't contrast with sibling tools like hop_list or git_worktree_current beyond the git command.

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