Create Workspace Subgraph

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint false), description discloses caching behavior of UUID and return format. Adds value by explaining that the subgraph ID is cached for later reference, which is not evident from 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?

Two concise paragraphs with Args/Returns sections. No redundant information. Front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence earns its place.

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 creation tool with 3 required parameters, the description covers purpose, parameters, return shape, and a behavioral note (caching). No output schema needed as description provides return structure.

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?

All three parameters are documented in schema (100% coverage). Description restates them but adds minimal new semantics (e.g., steps are node IDs). Baseline 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a subgraph in a Coalesce workspace' with specific verb and resource, and explains subgraphs group nodes visually. Distinguishes from sibling tools like delete/update/get.

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?

Mentions caching for future edits, implying when to use (when later edits are needed), but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. Usage context is implied but not exhaustive.

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