Create scripts

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

Discloses transactional behavior (created inside one ChangeHistoryService recording), a failure mode (Studio refuses while another recording is in progress), and that the response indicates whether the recording opened. This goes beyond the annotations' basic readOnly/destructive hints.

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?

Three concise paragraphs: purpose, batching/transaction details, and guidance/preference. Each sentence adds value with no redundancy. The most important information (what it does) is front-loaded.

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?

Comprehensive for the tool's complexity: it covers creation, batching, undo, failure modes, parameter preferences, and sibling tools. Though no output schema is provided, the description hints at what the response contains (whether the recording opened).

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?

Although the schema already describes all parameters (100% coverage), the description adds valuable context: the purpose of batching for undo, the interplay between `className` and `runContext`, and the recommendation to prefer `Script` over `LocalScript`. This enriches parameter understanding.

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?

Clearly states it creates Script, LocalScript, or ModuleScript instances with source. Explicitly differentiates from `script_edit` for modifying existing scripts, so the agent knows exactly what this tool does.

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?

Provides concrete usage guidance: batch related scripts for a single undo, prefer `Script` with `runContext: 'Client'` over `LocalScript`, and directs to `script_edit` for existing scripts. This helps the agent decide when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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