ncloud_sourcebuild_list_branches

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context such as return format, pagination, rate limits, or additional constraints. It merely restates the action and resource, providing no value beyond what the annotation already indicates.

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, succinct sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It contains no redundant information and is appropriately sized for a simple, one-parameter read-only operation.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the response contains (e.g., a list of branch names or objects). It does not, and it also fails to clarify the SourceBuild-specific context or differentiate from sibling tools. The minimal description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 covers the sole repositoryName parameter with a helpful description ('Repository name (from list_repositories)'), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 (List) and resource (branches of a SourceCommit repository), with a specific verb and object. However, it does not distinguish this SourceBuild-specific tool from the sibling ncloud_sourcecommit_list_branches, which likely serves the same core function, so it misses the full 5 for sibling differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like ncloud_sourcecommit_list_branches and ncloud_sourcedeploy_get_sourcecommit_branches offer similar branch-listing capabilities, but no context or exclusions are given, leaving the agent without decision support.

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