create_branch

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

Discloses significant non-obvious behavior beyond the annotations: the editor reloads, the tool waits for reconnect, and it returns the resulting vcs_status on the new branch. It also states the uniqueness constraint and maximum name length. Nothing in the description contradicts the 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?

Every sentence earns its place: action and purpose, default source behavior, important reload/return behavior, naming constraints, and the explicit alternative. The description is compact, front-loaded, and free of redundancy.

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 creating-and-switching tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral context: creation, switching, reload, return value, name constraints, and the sibling alternative. The remaining parameter details are fully covered by the input schema, so nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by specifying the uniqueness requirement for 'name' and explicitly calling out the default source branch, which complements the schema's 'defaults to the current branch' note. It does not repeat all parameter details, but the schema already documents them well.

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?

States the specific operation ('Create a new branch'), its purpose ('scope a feature on its own branch'), and the immediate side effect ('switch the editor to it'). It also distinguishes itself from switch_branch by explicitly naming the alternative in the NOT-to-use note.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool ('create a new branch') and, more importantly, when not to use it ('to switch to an existing branch, use switch_branch'). It also clarifies default branching behavior and uniqueness requirements, which gives an agent enough context to decide between create_branch and switch_branch.

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