create_annotation_queue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Create') without any details about side effects, required permissions, response behavior, or handling of duplicate names. The note about score_config_ids is a parameter detail, not a behavioral trait.

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 highly concise, consisting of just two sentences: the first clearly states the tool's purpose, and the second provides a necessary parameter format note. There is no filler, redundancy, or unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description omits crucial context such as the meaning of the project parameter, any prerequisites, and how this tool fits into the broader annotation queue workflow. Given that annotations are absent and schema coverage is 0%, the description leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool with four parameters.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains only score_config_ids as 'comma-separated score config IDs to attach to the queue,' which is helpful, but leaves name, project, and description entirely unexplained. This is insufficient for a four-parameter tool with no other descriptions.

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 annotation queue' with a specific verb and resource. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_annotation_queue or create_annotation_queue_item, which operate on different aspects of the queue system. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, no cross-references to related tools for creating queue items or assignments, and no indication of appropriate contexts. Usage is only implied by the tool's name and the action verb.

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