Create container COMP

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., side effects, error cases, relationship to other nodes). It merely restates the creation action.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and front-loaded. Every word is meaningful with no redundancy.

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?

No output schema or mention of return value (e.g., created container path). No information about error handling, network modifications, or behavior when parent_path does not exist. Given the tool's simplicity, more context is needed.

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 coverage is 67% (parent_path and comp_type described, name missing). The description does not mention any parameters or clarify the purpose of 'name'. The schema already provides basic descriptions for two parameters, so the description adds no extra meaning.

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 self-contained COMP to hold a visual system' clearly states the verb (create), resource (COMP container), and purpose (hold a visual system). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_td_node and create_visual_system.

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 versus alternatives like create_td_node or when to choose 'container' vs 'base' for comp_type. No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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