List Git branches

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'List' conveys a non-mutating read operation and 'local' clarifies scope, which is useful. However, it does not disclose prerequisites, error behavior, or output details such as how the current branch is indicated.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundant restatement.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description captures the main behavior but omits what 'project' refers to and any usage or precondition context. An agent could infer much from the name and siblings, but the definition alone lacks full standalone guidance.

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 0%, and the description never mentions the required 'project' parameter. The parameter name and sibling tools like list_projects provide some context, but the description itself adds no meaning beyond the schema's type and required flag.

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 a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('local Git branches'), and the added detail that the current branch is also reported. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling operations like git_create_branch or git_status.

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 no explicit guidance about when to call this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state conditions such as needing a valid Git-initialized project. The only usage signal is the verb 'List', which implies a read-only branch inspection task, but that is left to inference.

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