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

Beyond annotations (which only cover readOnly/idempotent/destructive hints), it discloses that the result is a DRAFT requiring riddle_publish, that riddle_get reports it as context.duplicated, and that it requires the template-use permission plus Riddle-create in the target project. These are exactly the behavioral facts an agent cannot infer from structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then alternatives, then lifecycle and permissions. Dense but each clause carries information; the parenthetical enumerations of the copy's parts are slightly verbose but earn their place.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description explains the return shape (standard build-configuration envelope), the omit behavior, the draft lifecycle, and the auth prerequisites. For a create tool with four params this is complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by tying 'omit' to riddle_get's semantics, flagging that 'published' is the one omit that materially moves a copy of a template, and clarifying that per-block default maps are absent here — meaning beyond the schema's enum list.

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 and resource ('Creates a new Riddle from a template') plus the exact scope ('unchanged copy of it - content, settings and design preset'). It distinguishes itself from riddle_builder_create and riddle_template_get by name, so an agent can route correctly without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly says to use this 'whenever the template is what you want' and names the alternative workflow when you need to adapt it: read via riddle_template_get and build with riddle_builder_create. Both the when and the when-not are stated with the alternative tools.

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