crm_create_association

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention whether this is a mutating operation, what permissions are required, how errors are handled, or what the response looks like. For a creation tool with 5 required parameters, this leaves critical gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a basic tool description and gets straight to the point without unnecessary elaboration.

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 creation tool with 5 required parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what an association is, how it's used, what happens after creation, or provide any context beyond the minimal verb-noun pairing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'fromObjectType'/'toObjectType' enums represent, what 'associationTypes' array contains, or how IDs are formatted. The description fails to provide meaning beyond the bare 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 an association between two objects' clearly states the action (create) and resource (association), but it's vague about what an 'association' means in this CRM context. It doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'crm_batch_create_associations' or 'crm_delete_association', leaving ambiguity about when to use each.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch operations or when associations are appropriate. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage from parameter names alone.

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