delete_branch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the critical behavioral trait that the endpoint returns 405 due to a GitFlic API limitation and clarifies it is not an MCP server bug. This is highly transparent for a tool that will currently fail.

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 states the core action, the second delivers a necessary warning. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant content.

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 tool that is currently non-functional, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, that it's broken, and what to expect. The schema fully documents parameters, and no output schema is needed given the tool's current failure state.

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 input schema already covers all three parameters (owner, project, branchName) with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the baseline is 3 for 100% schema coverage.

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 states 'Delete a branch from a GitFlic project' using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like create_branch or list_branches, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description gives explicit when-not-to-use guidance: 'Do not use until GitFlic fixes the API.' It explains the reason (405 error) but does not suggest alternative tools or methods, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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