fabric_git_update_from_git

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects (e.g., overwriting local changes), conflict handling, or auth requirements. The presence of a conflictResolutionPolicy parameter is not explained in the description.

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 single sentence, which is concise but overly brief. It lacks structure (e.g., sections) and could usefully include more detail without losing 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters with limited descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values or post-condition state. The tool's behavior in terms of workspace Git status is unclear.

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 description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. Two parameters lack descriptions (conflictResolutionPolicy, workspaceHead), and the description does not explain their purpose. Schema coverage is 50%, but the description does not compensate.

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 action ('update') and the resource ('workspace from remote Git commit'). However, it is vague about what exactly is updated (e.g., workspace items, definition, or state). Among sibling Git tools, it distinguishes itself but could be more 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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fabric_git_commit or fabric_git_get_status. There are no prerequisites, restrictions, or context for use.

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