create_branch

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

No behavioral traits are disclosed. The annotation 'openWorldHint: true' hints at unspecified side effects, but the description does not clarify what happens if the branch already exists, any permissions needed, or the scope of creation. The lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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?

While the description is very concise (six words), it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. The single sentence does not earn its place as it repeats the tool name without adding utility. A truly concise description would integrate key context in a compact manner.

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 three parameters, the lack of output schema, and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is critically incomplete. It omits any explanation of return values, error handling, or side effects, and fails to provide the agent with sufficient context to correctly invoke and process the tool's results.

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 has 100% description coverage, with each parameter already explained (e.g., 'ref' as source branch/commit, 'branch' as name, 'project_id' as ID/path). The tool description adds no further semantic value beyond what the schema provides, 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 'Create a new branch' is essentially a tautology of the tool name 'create_branch'. It adds no distinguishing detail from sibling branch operations like 'get_branch' or 'delete_branch' and thus fails to provide a specific verb-resource context beyond the name itself.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'fork_repository' or 'protect_branch'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria, 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.