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

Goes well beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false). Discloses that studios count against the plan limit and can consume a slot, that confirmation is on by default but switchable, and the API key/access requirement. These are high-value operational facts an agent needs.

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-loads purpose, then constraints, in concise sentences. Slightly dense with multiple caveats but each earns its place. Could be tightened marginally.

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 2-param creation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, quota impact, confirmation/auth requirements, and reach. Nothing critical is missing.

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 both parameters are already documented, including the default for recording_type. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Create a new studio') and clarifies it is 'for a show'. Distinguishes from sibling riverside_list_studios and other riverside tools without requiring the 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?

Explains when to confirm (each call by default, toggle-able) and that it 'reaches other people' requiring user confirmation. Does not name sibling alternatives like riverside_list_studios, but context is strong.

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