SupplySources_createSupplySource

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose side effects and runtime behavior; it only says 'Create', which implies mutation but gives no detail on permissions, idempotency, or consequences. The 'Runs in your Kuudo deployment' clause is a hint about execution context but is too opaque to count as transparent disclosure.

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?

At 13 words it is terse, but the main action is buried after two unclear clauses ('Catalog entry', 'Runs in your Kuudo deployment'). No sentence is expanded wastefully, yet the ambiguity of the first two phrases prevents a higher score.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, an empty input schema, and no mention of required fields or return values, the description is far from complete for a create operation. The single clear clause cannot compensate for the missing invocation details.

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 is empty but permits additionalProperties, so there are no documented parameters and no description-level field guidance. An agent invoking this create operation is left without any idea what body or fields to supply. This is a serious gap despite the 0-parameter count, because a 'new supply source' necessarily requires input data.

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 ends with the explicit action 'Create a new supply source', which is a clear verb+resource statement and distinguishes this operation from sibling tools like update, archive, and get. The opening 'Catalog entry' and environment clause are ambiguous, which prevents a perfect score.

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 is given on when to use creation versus update, archive, or status operations, nor are any prerequisites or preconditions stated. The only extra context is the deployment location, which does not help usage selection.

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