ghl_create_faq

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It communicates the outcome (returns the created FAQ object with ID) and the mutation implied by 'Create', but does not mention potential failure modes, permissions, or the need for an existing knowledge base.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the primary action and outcome, with no filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

For a simple create tool with three well-described parameters, the description adequately covers the purpose and return value. However, it does not explicitly mention the prerequisite that the knowledge base must already exist, which is a minor gap given the sibling list includes KB creation tools.

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 provides 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the description adds little parameter-level meaning beyond repeating 'question and answer'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' with a clearly defined resource ('a new FAQ question and answer inside a knowledge base') and states the return value, making it easily distinguishable from sibling update/delete/list FAQ tools.

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 description implies usage for adding a new FAQ to an existing knowledge base but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like update_faq or list_faqs. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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