release_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It reveals an important behavior: 'Automatically uses the linked project if no projectId is provided.' However, it does not mention other behaviors like potential side effects, permissions, or return values, which is a gap but keeps the description minimally viable.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. The main action and key behavior are front-loaded, and the description is efficient. Every sentence earns its place.

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 description covers the creation intent and the project fallback behavior. However, it omits any mention of what the tool returns (e.g., the created release object) since no output schema is provided. Given the lack of output schema and the presence of 4 parameters, the description is adequate but could be more complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds value only for projectId by explaining automatic project fallback. Other parameters (name, description, targetDate) rely solely on the schema. This minor addition maintains the baseline of 3.

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 'Create a new release for a project' and specifies it is used to 'plan a new version or milestone.' This is a specific verb+resource pair, and the sibling tools (release_get, release_list, release_update) are distinct actions, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to plan a new version or milestone,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. It does not mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like release_update, but the intent is well-defined and sufficient for an agent to decide.

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