create_quest

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only conveys that the tool creates a quest and provides no information about side effects, required parent entity, validation, permissions, or error behavior. The description does not contradict any annotation because none exist.

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 a single short sentence with no redundant wording, but it essentially restates the tool name and adds no substantive information. This is under-specification rather than effective conciseness.

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?

The tool requires a campaignId and a nested data object, has no output schema, and has no annotations. The description is far too sparse to allow an agent to call this tool correctly; it gives no indication of the data structure, the relationship to a campaign, or what a successful response looks like.

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 0%, and the description does not mention either parameter (campaignId or data). Since data is a nested object and campaignId is a required number, the agent receives no help understanding what values to provide or what the data object should contain.

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 a specific action ('Create') and resource ('quest'), which clearly distinguishes it from read/update/delete siblings. However, it adds no additional qualification about what a quest is or how it relates to campaigns, so it is clear but minimal.

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 update_quest or delete_quest, nor is there any mention that a campaign must already exist. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and sibling names.

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