academy_create_concept_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that this creates a draft (not published) and describes the optional bannerUrl/ownerEmail behaviors. However, it doesn't disclose what happens on success/failure, whether it overwrites an existing name, or if permissions are required.

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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the core purpose (create draft page) and each parameter is explained inline with concrete examples. Slightly long, but every clause adds value.

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?

For a creation tool with 5 params and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral and parameter details well. It could benefit from noting response behavior or idempotency, but the main gaps (what the tool does, what each param means) are filled.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, and it does reasonably well: it explains name as filename-without-path with example 'Mijn-onderwerp', bodyHtml as an HTML fragment with h2/p/ul, bannerUrl as full URL from SiteAssets, and ownerEmail as byline with example. However, some specifics like title semantics and validation rules are not covered.

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 the verb (create), resource (concept-page/draft page on HTJZ Academy), and explicitly notes it's a draft not published. This distinguishes it from siblings like academy_publish_page and academy_update_page_text.

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 explains this creates an unpublished draft, which implicitly positions it against academy_publish_page. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the draft-vs-published clarification provides clear usage context.

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