bb_create_pull_request

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It describes the action and parameters but does not disclose side effects (beyond close_source_branch), success/failure behavior, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The agent cannot infer the overall behavior beyond creation.

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?

The description is a clear bulleted list starting with the action. It is appropriately sized for 8 parameters and avoids redundancy. However, it could be slightly more concise by merging default values inline, but overall well-structured.

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 8 parameters and high schema coverage, the description covers the necessary input information. An output schema exists, so return values are handled elsewhere. However, behavioral gaps (e.g., error handling, idempotency) reduce completeness for an agent unfamiliar with Bitbucket.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal value. It restates parameter names and short descriptions, but does not elaborate on constraints, formats, or relationships. For example, 'reviewers: List of Bitbucket account UUIDs' is identical to the schema. No additional nuance.

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 explicitly states 'Create a new Bitbucket pull request' and lists relevant parameters. The name 'bb_create_pull_request' clearly indicates a creation action, and siblings are all about comments or retrieval, so the purpose is distinct and specific.

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 this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it compares to similar tools like 'bb_edit_pull_request_comment' or 'bb_get_pull_request'. The context is implied but not explicit.

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