external_squads_create

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

Annotations only declare that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive write. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of permissions, whether names must be unique, whether the new squad is empty, or what a successful call returns. For a mutation tool with no output schema, that is a real gap.

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 three words it is maximally front-loaded and wastes nothing, but the terseness is under-specification rather than efficiency — there is no content to trim because almost nothing was said.

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 write tool with an undocumented required parameter, no output schema, and ambiguous positioning against the `squads_*` and other `external_squads_*` siblings. The description does not supply enough context for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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 0%, so the single `name` parameter is documented only by its regex and length bounds. The description does not mention the parameter at all, so any naming constraints or semantics beyond the pattern are left to the agent to reverse-engineer.

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 gives a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('external squad'), so the basic action is unambiguous. However, it does not explain what an 'external squad' is or how it differs from the sibling `squads_create`, leaving the agent unable to tell the two resources apart beyond the name.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus `squads_create` or any other sibling, nor any stated prerequisites (e.g., required scopes or that the squad is for external users). The agent must infer all selection criteria.

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