create_agent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does add one meaningful behavioral trait beyond the name: 'The agent will be ready to take calls immediately,' which tells the agent the created resource is live at once. However, it remains sparse for a mutating creation tool — it does not disclose error cases, duplication behavior, idempotency, or cost/billing implications.

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 short sentences with zero waste. The primary action is front-loaded in sentence one, and sentence two contributes a distinct, valuable behavioral fact (immediate readiness). Every word earns its place.

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?

The 100%-covered schema handles parameter understanding, and the description discloses the most important post-creation behavior (immediate readiness). However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not address the return value, failure modes, or validation outcomes an agent would encounter when invoking this tool with 10 parameters.

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 all 10 parameters including the 3 required ones already carry descriptions, enums, and examples. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the 'voice AI agent' framing, so the baseline of 3 applies without needing compensation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new voice AI agent on Movoice AI.' It is clearly a creation tool, distinct from the sibling list/get/update/delete tools. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings by name — the uniqueness of the verb 'create' does that work implicitly.

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?

The word 'new' implies this is for creating previously nonexistent agents, and 'ready to take calls immediately' signals that no separate activation step follows. But there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no alternatives named, and no exclusions (e.g., when to use update_agent instead for existing agents).

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