Create module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It transparently conveys the creating behavior and the parent-child nesting relationship, but it omits consequences such as validation of projectKey/parentKey, duplicate-name behavior, or the shape of the created module response.

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 compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and the optional nesting behavior placed second. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 fully documented parameters, the description covers the essential inputs and the one optional behavior. It lacks an output schema and does not describe return values or failure modes, so an agent cannot fully predict the result or error expectations.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already self-documenting. The description reinforces the parentKey nesting semantics but adds no substantial meaning beyond the schema's 'Existing module key to nest under.'

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 specific verb ('create') and resource ('module (section)') and clarifies scope ('for test cases in a project'). The optional parentKey detail distinguishes it from sibling creation tools like create_release or create_project.

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 gives an explicit conditional for nesting ('Pass parentKey to create it as a child of an existing module'), which tells when the third parameter is relevant. It does not state when create_module should be preferred over sibling tools or provide any when-not/exclusion guidance; usage context is mostly implied.

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