hires_create_question

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states the tool creates a reusable question, implying a write operation, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, reversibility, or return behavior. The mention of 'optional answer options for dropdown types' provides some constraint context, but overall transparency is limited.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no unnecessary words. 'Create a reusable question with optional answer options for dropdown types. Used by forms and questionnaires.' Every sentence earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 has 4 parameters (2 required), no output schema, and no annotations. The description covers the tool's core purpose and usage context, but does not mention return values, prerequisites, or any potential side effects. Given the lack of annotations, more detail about expected outcomes would improve completeness. It is adequate but leaves gaps.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only a slight clarification for 'options' ('dropdown types') which is redundant with the schema's 'for select/multiselect question types'. It does not add any new syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so it stays at baseline.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' and resource 'reusable question' with clear scope ('with optional answer options for dropdown types'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hires_get_question, hires_update_question, and hires_delete_question by clearly indicating it is the creation operation. The additional context 'Used by forms and questionnaires' further clarifies its purpose.

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?

The description provides clear usage context: 'Used by forms and questionnaires' implies when to use this tool. It does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, but the verb and resource make it obvious this is for creating new reusable questions, not for updating or listing them. This is sufficient for a simple create tool.

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