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

The description states it is state-changing and creates an item 'directly after authorization', which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=false). It adds minor context about authorization but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or failure behaviors beyond what annotations imply.

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 a single, compact sentence that clearly conveys the tool's core purpose and key conditions without redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 moderate complexity and absence of an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it creates, where, and the type-based content requirements. It lacks details on expected return values or edge cases, but these are not required given the schema and no output specification.

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?

All 7 parameters have schema descriptions, so coverage is 100%. The description adds a small hint that 'content or URL' is relevant depending on type, but this largely reiterates schema details. No significant additional meaning is provided beyond the schema.

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 ('Space item') with explicit item types (page/document, folder, external_link). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling 'create-space-document' tool, which may overlap with the page/document type.

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 an explicit 'Use this when...' condition, but does not mention when not to use it or direct users to an alternative tool (e.g., create-space-document for documents). This leaves some ambiguity in tool selection.

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