create_server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Create a new server' communicates a mutating action but does not disclose idempotency, duplicate handling, required permissions, side effects, or whether validation occurs.

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 very short and has no fluff, which is structurally clean. However, it mostly restates the tool name and does not earn its place by adding contextual value, so it is minimal rather than excellently concise.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain expected return values, side effects, or preconditions. None of that is present, so the context is incomplete for an agent deciding whether and how to invoke this tool.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the schema already carries the parameter documentation. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters, which keeps this at the baseline score.

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' and the resource 'server', so an agent can tell this is the creation action as opposed to list_servers or validate_server. However, it adds no details about what kind of server this creates beyond the parameter names, so it is clear but not richly distinguishing.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use create_server versus sibling tools such as list_servers or validate_server. The description only restates the action and does not provide prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions.

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