grokbot_create_agent

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 and falls well short. It does not say whether names must be unique, whether creation is idempotent, what permissions are needed, or what happens on failure — all relevant for a mutation tool creating a persistent agent.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, with the action stated first. But the remaining two fragments are cryptic ('Only when the user asked') and partially redundant ('harness is box|temporal' duplicating the schema), so brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined 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?

For a 4-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. An agent gets no sense of side effects, required inputs beyond the schema's required field, or what a successful creation returns.

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 only 25% (only harness is documented), so the description should compensate but does not. Its only parameter content, 'harness is box|temporal', merely restates the schema's own description and adds nothing about the undocumented name, title, and description parameters.

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 verb and resource ('Create a Grok Bot agent'), which is unambiguous against the create/update/delete/list sibling set. It stops short of explicitly differentiating itself from grokbot_update_agent or describing scope, but the core purpose is clear.

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?

'Only when the user asked' is an explicit usage condition, functioning as a guardrail against proactive agent creation. However, it is a terse fragment that gives no guidance on prerequisites or when an alternative sibling (e.g., update) would be correct, leaving usage largely implied.

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