create_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states a mutation ('create') but does not disclose what the response returns, whether the operation has side effects (e.g., notifications), permission requirements, or how errors manifest. For a state-changing tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant 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?

The single sentence is efficient and front-loaded with the core purpose. No filler or redundancy. It earns its place but is arguably too terse given the missing usage and behavioral context.

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?

This is a 7-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description covers only the essential purpose. It fails to address the folder-vs-folderless distinction, potential required field interactions (e.g., status matching a space status), and what the successful call returns. For a tool with this complexity, it should provide more.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 7 parameters with descriptive text (e.g., priority value meanings, due date units). The description itself adds nothing about parameters; baseline 3 applies since the schema handles the documentation burden adequately.

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 'Create a new list in a folder' states a clear verb+resource ('create'+'list') and identifies the containing location (folder). It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling create_folderless_list, which creates a list without a folder — a meaningful distinction the description omits.

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 on when to use this tool vs create_folderless_list, which is its most direct alternative. The description gives no context about when a list belongs in a folder vs. folderless, and doesn't mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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