git_get_context

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

No annotations provided. Description lists outputs (branch, commits, status, diff, Jira keys) and the effect of includeDiff. However, does not state that the tool is read-only or specify any prerequisites (e.g., must be in a git repo).

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 with no wasted words. First sentence front-loads all context items; second sentence adds optional flag. Efficient and clear.

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 all key aspects: what is returned, optional diff, and Jira integration. Lacks details on output format and error conditions, but sufficient for a gathering tool without output schema.

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%. Description adds context for includeDiff ('full uncommitted diff') but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond schema descriptions. Falls to baseline due to high 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?

Description clearly states it provides a comprehensive set of git and Jira context items for coding/review tasks, distinguishing it from sibling tools like git_get_diff and get_dev_context.

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?

Explicitly says 'Start here', indicating primary usage for coding/review tasks. Mentions optional includeDiff parameter. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but context signals and sibling names imply differentiation.

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