infomaniak_create_site

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

Discloses the two-phase commit behavior beyond annotations, including the plan and confirmation_token flow. Annotations already indicate destructive and non-read-only nature, but the added workflow details are valuable.

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?

Two sentences with front-loaded purpose and efficient description of the two-phase commit. Every sentence is necessary and well-structured.

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?

Covers the two-phase workflow but lacks details on the return value of the first call (the plan) and how to interpret the confirmation_token. Output schema may cover return values, but the description could be more complete for a complex tool.

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 0%, but description only mentions parameters generically ('same params + token'). Does not explain the role of hosting_id, fqdn, directory, or environment, failing to add meaning over the schema.

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?

Clearly states it creates a new site on an Infomaniak web hosting, with specific verb 'creates' and resource 'site'. Distinguishes from siblings like delete_site or find_site.

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?

Describes the two-phase commit process, making clear how to use the tool in two calls. Does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the creation context is well-defined.

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