spoolman_create_spool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that filament_id is required and that remaining_weight and used_weight are mutually exclusive, but these are parameter constraints, not behavioral traits. The description does not disclose return value, permissions, side effects beyond creating a spool, or error handling. The core mutation is already implied by the name.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every word earns its place. It delivers the key constraints without unnecessary fluff.

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 has 11 parameters and no output schema, the description is quite brief. It covers the essential constraints and the schema fills parameter details, but it lacks contextual information about what a spool represents or what the response will be. It is minimally viable for invoking the tool but not fully comprehensive for an agent navigating the broader domain.

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 covers all 11 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so a baseline of 3 applies. The description adds value by explicitly stating the mutual exclusivity rule between remaining_weight and used_weight and highlighting the required filament_id, which goes beyond what the schema states. However, it does not add semantics for other params.

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 'Create a new spool in Spoolman' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling create tools like create_filament and create_vendor. The added constraints about filament_id and weight parameters further clarify the tool's function.

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 implies this is the creation counterpart to update_spool, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_spool or use_spool. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance beyond the basic creation purpose.

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