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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world operation, and an output schema exists. The description adds that multiple prompts can be created in one call and that creation is scoped to a website, but it does not disclose validation rules, duplicate behavior, limits, or permission requirements.

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 single sentence is compact and front-loaded with no wasted wording. However, for a tool with a nested schema and many optional fields, this brevity reflects under-specification rather than appropriately sized conciseness.

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?

The tool is complex: it accepts a nested array of prompt objects with many optional fields and a source enum. The description only states basic purpose and batch scope, leaving an agent without guidance on how to structure entries or interpret required versus optional fields, even though the output schema covers return values.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only vaguely maps to website_id and prompts. It says nothing about the source enum, required prompt text, nested prompt fields, or the many optional metadata fields such as tag_ids, topic_id, or persona_ids.

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?

States a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('prompts') scoped to a website. It also implies batch creation with 'one or more,' but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like update_prompt, create_prompt_tag, or start_prompt_discovery.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_prompt or create_prompt_tag, and gives no prerequisites, duplicate-handling guidance, or contextual constraints.

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