voice_ai_create_action

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, implying a side-effecting, non-read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the bare statement, such as potential side effects, required permissions, or response format. It neither contradicts nor enriches the annotation profile.

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 ultra-concise (one short phrase) but is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It does not 'earn its place' because it provides almost no information beyond the name. There is no front-loading of critical details, and it fails to structure any useful content.

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?

This is a complex tool with a nested actionParameters object and eight possible actionType values, yet the description provides no overview. It does not explain what an Agent Action is, which action types exist, how parameters vary by type, or what the response looks like. The schema offers detail, but the description leaves the agent without high-level context needed to decide when and how to call it.

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%, meaning every parameter has a description in the schema, including the complex actionParameters object. The tool description adds no parameter info, but the schema already documents all fields and the enum for actionType. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the comprehensive 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?

The description 'Create Agent Action' states a verb and resource, making the core purpose clear. However, it is extremely generic and does not distinguish this from sibling tools like voice_ai_create_agent or voice_ai_update_action. It lacks any specificity about what an 'Agent Action' entails beyond the name.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, mention prerequisites, or note any context such as requiring an existing agent. An agent would have to infer usage solely from the tool name and schema.

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