Create mission

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the return value (mission ID and authoritative budget version) and the durable nature of the record. However, it omits details about idempotency, permissions, or side effects, though the idempotencyKey parameter hints at retry behavior.

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 one concise sentence that front-loads the core action and adds return value context. Every word earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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 create tool with seven parameters, a nested budget object, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what 'durable mission record' entails, how budget limits are enforced, or how the authoritative budget version is used. The return value clue is helpful but leaves major gaps.

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 any parameter. With seven parameters including a nested budget object, the description provides no semantic guidance beyond the raw schema field names, leaving the agent to guess about constraints like risk or successCriteria.

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 identifies the action ('Create'), the resource ('durable mission record'), and the ordering context ('before spawning any Terra agents'). It differentiates from sibling tools like mission_get and mission_close by conveying it is the create operation.

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 phrase 'before spawning any Terra agents' provides clear timing context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list makes the create-vs-read/update distinction implicit.

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