rename_branch

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions constraints but omits behavioral traits like idempotency, side effects on live branches, permissions, or return values. Minimal disclosure beyond basic constraints.

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, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, then constraints and a helpful hint. Highly concise and efficient.

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?

Covers purpose and key constraints, but lacks details on outcome (e.g., effect on live branches, propagation), error scenarios, or post-rename behavior. Adequate for a simple tool but incomplete for an agent to fully understand consequences.

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 description coverage is 100%, so schema already explains all parameters. Description adds no significant parameter-specific info beyond what schema provides. Baseline 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?

Clearly states 'Rename a branch' with specific verb and resource. Includes key constraints (default branch cannot be renamed, 'main' reserved) and references sibling tool list_branches for finding branch IDs, distinguishing it from other branch-related tools.

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 when-not-to-use conditions (default branch, 'main' reserved) and suggests using list_branches as a prerequisite. Lacks comparison to all sibling tools but offers sufficient context for typical use.

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