whatsms_admin_create_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Create a new user,' which implies a mutation but does not mention required permissions, possible errors, or side effects. This is a significant transparency gap for a write 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?

The description is a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for a simple CRUD tool, though it adds little value beyond the tool name. It earns a 4 for being concise and well-structured.

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 tool's mutation nature and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is severely underspecified. It does not explain prerequisites, side effects, or response behavior. The agent has no context beyond the basic action, making the description incomplete for practical use.

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?

The input schema has no defined parameters but allows arbitrary properties, and the description does not hint at what parameters to provide (e.g., user details). Since the schema is empty, the baseline for 0 params is 4, but the open schema creates ambiguity, and the description adds no parameter information. The agent has no idea what fields to send, so this is a critical deficiency.

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') and the resource ('a new user in the WhatSMS system'), which matches the tool name and distinguishes it from sibling update/delete/get tools. However, it does not provide any unique scope or differentiating details beyond the basic action, so it is clear but not exceptional.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description merely states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage. This is no guidance at all, so it earns a low score.

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