create_attribute_term

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

The annotation openWorldHint=false provides minimal behavioral context, and the description adds little beyond stating the creation action. It doesn't disclose side effects, idempotency, or error behavior, but because annotations exist, the burden is partially met. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. The first sentence states purpose, the second provides a pragmatic alternative, with zero redundancy or filler.

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 simple create tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the main alternative. It doesn't mention the optional 'fields' parameter, but the schema already documents that. Given the low complexity, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context with the example 'add 2kg to Weight', clarifying that 'name' is the term value and 'attribute_id' must reference the desired attribute. This helps map example values to schema parameters.

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 'Add a new value' and identifies the resource as a product attribute term. It provides a concrete example ('2kg' to Weight) and explicitly contrasts with the batch sibling tool, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly states 'Use batch_update_attribute_terms for multiple values at once,' giving a clear alternative for batch operations. This establishes when to use this tool (single value) versus the batch tool (multiple values), satisfying the when/alternative criteria.

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