lograft_gather_repo_context

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It declares the tool is pure read-only and shells out to git, which are important behavioral traits. No contradictions.

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 sentences: the first explains the function with limits, the second provides usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with key info.

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 simple tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, limits, usage, and read-only nature. Lacks explicit output structure but is still comprehensive given low complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions the default for sinceDays (14 days) and maxCommits (200), but does not fully explain repoPath or provide detailed parameter semantics beyond these defaults. Adds some but not complete value.

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 gathers a snapshot of recent commits, current branch, and origin URL from a git repository. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool lograft_investigate, indicating this is for partial pipelines.

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 states that most users should use lograft_investigate, and this tool is atomic for partial pipelines. Also provides defaults and maximum limits (14 days, 200 commits) for when to use.

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