github_code_scanning_create_variant_analysis

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as destructive potential, authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The description only says 'Create', implying mutation but with no further detail.

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 very short (one line), which is concise but lacks front-loading of critical information. It is not appropriately sized; it skimps on details that would help the agent use the tool effectively.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns or how the variant analysis is managed. It provides no such context, leaving the agent uninformed about the outcome of the creation.

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% (all three parameters have descriptions), so baseline is 3. However, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the body object's expected structure or constraints.

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 states 'Create a CodeQL variant analysis' which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_variant_analysis' by focusing on creation, but lacks elaboration on what exactly a variant analysis is.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other code scanning create tools). There is no context for prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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