Push Files

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond 'create a commit'. It does not disclose that this operation pushes to a branch, any authentication needs, or potential side effects like forced pushes. No contradiction with annotations.

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 only one sentence, which is concise but overly brief. It lacks structure and fails to convey essential information. Under-specification, not true conciseness.

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?

With 9 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain return values, error handling, or the effects of the commit creation, making it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions exist. The description does not explain any of the 9 parameters (2 required), such as branch, commit_message, files, actions, etc., leaving the agent without guidance on parameter usage and purpose.

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 clearly states the tool creates a commit with multiple file actions, which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like gitlab_create_or_update_file (single file) and gitlab_delete_branch. However, it does not elaborate on what 'file actions' entail, slightly limiting specificity.

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. Siblings include gitlab_create_or_update_file for single-file operations, but the description does not mention scenarios or exclusions.

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