mmex_assets_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the creation action but does not disclose side effects, validation rules, default values, error behavior, or idempotency. The mention of optional db_path and db_key is helpful, but overall behavioral context is sparse.

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 bullet-like docstring listing all parameters. While it front-loads the action sentence, it is somewhat verbose (13 lines) and could be more concise by grouping related parameters or omitting obvious ones. Adequate but not optimally structured.

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?

With 12 parameters, 3 required, and no annotations, the description should cover more contextual details like return value, error handling, and validation rules. The existence of an output schema is noted but its contents are unknown. The description does not address prerequisites or side effects, leaving gaps for a complex create operation.

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%, yet the description explains each parameter's meaning (e.g., 'value_change_mode: Value change mode: Percentage or Linear') and provides examples (e.g., 'asset_type: Asset type (e.g., Property, Automobile)'). This adds significant value beyond the schema titles. However, some parameters lack constraints or enumeration details despite default values.

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 starts with 'Create a new asset in the MMEX database,' clearly stating the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mmex_assets_list, mmex_assets_update, etc., which have different verbs.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description only lists parameters, leaving the agent to infer that creation is appropriate when a new asset should be added. No context on limitations or prerequisites.

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