Api journeys create

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it is a non-idempotent, non-destructive write. The description adds zero behavioral context — no mention of what gets created, what the body must contain, or side effects.

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?

Technically terse, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. The single token earns nothing and front-loads no information beyond the name.

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?

A mutation tool with an opaque free-form body, no output schema, no annotations explaining the write semantics, and a description that is only the tool name. Nothing helps an agent call it correctly.

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?

There is one parameter (body) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about it. The agent has no idea what payload shape a 'journey' create expects, and the schema itself is an untyped free-form object.

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 is only the literal string "api_journeys_create", which restates the tool name and title without adding a verb or resource explanation. An agent cannot tell what a 'journey' is here or how this create differs from journeys_rename, journeys_upgrade, or journey_steps_create.

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?

No guidance whatsoever on when to use this versus the many sibling journey tools (journeys_list, journeys_rename_create, journeys_upgrade_create, journey_steps_create). The agent must infer everything from the name alone.

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