Create GitHub pull request

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'ready-for-review' but does not disclose whether the PR is created as draft, required permissions, or rate limits. For a mutation tool, more behavior context (e.g., side effects, authentication) is 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 of 14 words, front-loaded with key information. No redundant or 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?

No output schema or annotations exist. The description does not explain return values, error scenarios, or workflow integration with sibling tools. For a 5-parameter tool in a complex workflow, it lacks completeness.

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% (all five parameters have descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 action ('create') and resource ('pull request'), specifying it is from a feature branch into the base branch. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like github_create_feature_branch which creates branches.

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 the feature branch must already be pushed ('from a pushed feature branch'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like github_push_feature_branch or github_create_feature_branch. Missing explicit exclusions or preferred contexts.

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