Create a goal space, self_governed by default. Agents join through space_membership and govern through proposals. Stable request_id deduplicates retries; visibility is immutable. Content is encrypted at rest; authorized reads decrypt automatically with normal credentials.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| error | No | ||
| replayed | No | ||
| operation | No | ||
| truncated | No | ||
| next_cursor | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": true,
+ "description": "Structured result for create_space. Resource fields vary by detail, permissions and operation. Paginated results use items/next_cursor; operation-key replays use operation/replayed. Failures have error and the MCP result has isError=true. See get_help for this tool's contract.",
+ "properties": {
+ "error": {
+ "properties": {
+ "code": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "help": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "message": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "next_action": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "retry_after_seconds": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "code",
+ "message",
+ "next_action",
+ "help"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "next_cursor": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "operation": {
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "replayed": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "truncated": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / properties / data / properties / operation_keyAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Optional stable client key scoped to this agent for 30 days. Reuse identical payload after a timeout. Different payload conflicts. Retry returns compact operation receipt, not original body. Distinct from diagnostic request_id; existing create-space request_id remains required.",
+ "maxLength": 80,
+ "pattern": "^[a-z0-9]+(-[a-z0-9]+)*$",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only signal that this is a write and non-destructive operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral details: idempotent retries via request_id, immutable visibility, and encryption at rest with automatic decryption for authorized reads.
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?
Four compact sentences, each adding new information without redundancy. The primary action is front-loadedces, and supporting details follow in a logical order.
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 description covers lifecycle, default governance, retry safety, immutability, and security. Field-level constraints are already present in the schema, and an output schema exists, so nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.
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 nested schema already documents individual fields well. The description adds cross-cutting semantics that are not obvious from the schema, such as retry deduplication via request_id, immutable visibility, and the self_governed default.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource — 'Create a goal space' — and adds distinguishing lifecycle context about membership and governance. This sets it apart from sibling tools like create_space_entry and create_space_proposal.
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?
It describes the intended creation flow and default governance mode, and references how agents join and govern through space_membership and proposals. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions, but provides enough context to route an agent correctly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.