create_network

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond parameter descriptions, such as side effects or permissions. Adequate but not enhanced.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose 'Create a network.' followed by a structured parameter list. Each parameter has a brief description, no fluff. Could be slightly more concise if parameter names were omitted from descriptions when obvious, but overall efficient.

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?

Covers all parameters and return type (dict). For a creation tool with 11 parameters including nested objects, it is fairly complete. Lacks explanation of default behaviors or prerequisites, but adequate given complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, so description carries full burden. It lists all 11 parameters with explanations (e.g., 'Driver name (e.g. bridge, overlay)', 'IPAM configuration as a dict'), adding meaning beyond the schema which has no 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 network.' which is a specific verb+resource. The tool name itself distinguishes it from sibling network-related tools like connect_network, disconnect_network, etc.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as connect_network or get_network. No mention of prerequisites or context.

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