Api requirement nodes create

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true, but the description adds nothing about what a create does — no mention of required fields, side effects, permission/scope required, or whether re-posting duplicates a node (relevant given idempotentHint=false). The 'viewed' phrasing also misleads for a write endpoint.

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 a single short sentence with no bloat, but that brevity is under-specification, not conciseness — not one word of it helps an agent decide or invoke correctly.

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 endpoint with an untyped body, no output schema, and only coarse annotations, the description should at minimum say what a requirement node is and what the payload needs. It supplies neither, leaving the agent unable to call this 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 exactly one parameter, an opaque 'body' object with additionalProperties=true and 0% schema description coverage. The description supplies no information whatsoever about what the body must contain for a requirement node, so the parameter is effectively undocumented in both schema and prose.

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 restates the endpoint boilerplate ('allows requirements to be viewed or edited') rather than stating that this tool creates a requirement node. It doesn't even agree with the tool name's 'create' action, and it does nothing to distinguish this from the many sibling requirement_nodes endpoints (retrieve, list, update, partial_update, destroy).

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 statement of when to use this versus ciso_assistant_api_requirement_nodes_update, _partial_update, _batch_action_create, or _list. The generic 'viewed or edited' phrasing gives no trigger condition or prerequisite for calling a create endpoint.

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