Create Function

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the entire behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing. "Create" does convey a mutation/state change, but there is no mention of idempotency, error behavior when a function already exists, permission/state requirements, or how timeout and instance_id affect the operation.

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?

A single short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler — nothing bloated. It is efficient, though the terseness edges toward under-specification rather than true economy.

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 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It never explains the optional end/timeout/instance_id interplay, failure modes, or what the tool returns, leaving real gaps an agent must guess at.

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 the schema already documents end, address, timeout, and instance_id in detail, including hex-or-decimal for address. The description adds no syntax or semantics beyond "at an address", so the baseline 3 for a fully documented schema 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 clear verb and resource ("Create a function") plus the required anchor ("at an address"), so an agent knows exactly what the call produces. It does not, however, differentiate itself from adjacent siblings such as make_code or undefine_items, which also mutate code structure at an address.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, prerequisite, or alternative stated. The agent cannot tell from the description whether this supersedes make_code, whether it requires analysis to have run, or what to do if a function already exists at the address.

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