Create Custom Property

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

The description only states that it creates a property and returns an ID. It lacks disclosure of behavioral traits like whether it is a destructive operation (though creation is implied), required permissions, error conditions, or side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 concise at one sentence, with no superfluous words. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) to improve readability. The front-loading is good: action and resource are clear from the start.

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?

Given the complexity of a creation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks context on workspaceId usage, icon options, and behavioral details like whether the property is immediately available. The agent has limited information to make an informed selection.

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 75%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema. It reiterates the type enum values already in the schema. It does not clarify the purpose of 'workspaceId' or 'icon' beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does most of the work.

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 clearly states the action (create), resource (workspace-wide custom property definition), and supported types (text, number, checkbox, date). It also mentions the return value (propertyId). However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like 'create_tag' or 'create_collection', which could cause confusion.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether a workspace context is needed or how to obtain a workspaceId. There is no 'when not to use' or mention of related tools like 'delete_custom_property'.

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