create_view

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes unsupported types but fails to mention side effects, return values, or error scenarios. The minimal detail is adequate for a simple create operation but lacks depth for complex configurations.

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?

Two concise sentences deliver all necessary purpose and usage notes without extraneous content. The front-loading of the core function is effective.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete for a fully autonomous agent. While it covers the basic requirement and a key limitation, it lacks details on success behavior, error handling, and nested object structures.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds only a brief instruction to pass database_id and reiterates the dashboard exclusion seen in the schema, providing marginal added value.

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 Notion database view,' specifying the verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_view and update_view by mentioning unsupported dashboard views, which helps avoid misuse.

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 instructs to 'Pass database_id,' indicating a prerequisite, and explicitly states 'Dashboard views and dashboard widget placement are not supported,' providing clear exclusion criteria. However, it does not compare with alternatives like update_view or query_view.

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