ftp_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose side effects and behavioral traits. It only says 'Create' and lists arguments; it does not mention that this changes server state, whether it is reversible, what protection/confirmation flow exists, or what errors/preconditions apply. The 'confirm: Required' note is ambiguous and conflicts with the schema's default false and non-required status.

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 tightly structured: one clear purpose sentence followed by a compact Args list. Every line contributes information, and there is no filler or repetition of schema titles.

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?

Although the output schema covers return values and parameters are individually explained, the tool has no annotations and is a mutating server operation. The description omits prerequisites, side effects, permission needs, and the practical meaning of the confirm requirement, leaving the agent with an incomplete picture.

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 0%, so the description carries the parameter-documentation burden. It adds real meaning: it identifies the local part of the FTP username, lists path_type allowed values, clarifies custom_path is conditionally required, and explains impersonate and confirm. However, 'confirm: Required' appears to contradict the schema's required list and default, which prevents a 5.

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 opens with a specific verb and object: 'Create an FTP account.' This unambiguously identifies the action and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like ftp_delete and ftp_list without needing to inspect them.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions such as domain existence, permissions, or whether the user must already exist. The only usage cue is the verb 'Create,' which is minimal.

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