create_automation

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds no further behavioral context. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, rate limits, or success/failure behavior, providing zero value beyond the structured annotations.

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 sentence with no wasted words, and it is front-loaded with the action. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, yet for conciseness the absence of fluff earns a high score.

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?

Given the nested conditions/actions objects, four parameters, and no output schema, this one-line description is insufficient. It does not explain the automation's purpose, any constraints on conditions/actions, or what happens on successful creation, leaving an agent without essential context.

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 every parameter already has descriptive text. The tool description mentions no parameter details; the schema carries the full semantic burden, which is why the baseline of 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 'Create a new automation' is a near-verbatim restatement of the tool name, offering no definition of what an automation is or how it differs from create_trigger or create_macro. It identifies the verb and resource but leaves the resource's semantics vague, and it does not differentiate among sibling creation 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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It lacks any mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, so an agent cannot determine whether to choose this over create_trigger or create_macro.

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