push_workspace_version

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

Beyond the 'destructiveHint: true' annotation, the description discloses that a successful push holds a ~30 min write lock and how to release it with unlock_workspace. It also explains the response flag 'pushedToGit: true|false' and retry logic, adding valuable behavioral context not present in 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 well-organized with clear sections (general instruction, selector choice, response, common errors, post-behavior). It is thorough without being overly verbose; a few sentences could be tightened, but overall it efficiently conveys critical information.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, destructive action, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: mandatory selectors, error recovery, write lock duration, and response interpretation. It leaves no significant gaps for correct usage.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context: for gitPlatform it explains preferred use, for description it clarifies it's used as commit message and warns about localized objects causing stringification issues. This goes beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 pushes a workspace to a git repository by creating a new version. It distinguishes the action as version-creation plus git push, which differentiates it from sibling tools like 'push_workspace' and 'pull_workspace_version'.

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 gitPlatform vs repositoryId, including a strong instruction to always pass a selector for git pushes. Also covers common errors (400 'not up-to-date') and post-success behavior (write lock). This enables correct tool selection and invocation.

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