Create a Whatbox Directory

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds valuable behavioral context: it creates missing parents and is explicitly reversible. While it does not mention failure modes or permission requirements, for a simple mutation tool this is solid disclosure.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no filler. Every clause adds value: parent creation, root bound, and reversibility.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operation, its root constraint, and reversibility. The main small gap is the lack of explanation for rootIndex, but the default value and tool name help fill it.

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 should compensate for parameter meaning. It only indirectly hints that relativePath is relative to an allowed root and does not explain rootIndex or how roots are selected. This leaves the main parameter semantics under-specified.

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 the specific action 'Create a directory' and adds key scope details: missing parents are created and the operation is confined below an allowed root. This makes its purpose distinct from sibling tools like whatbox_list_directory or whatbox_move_path.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when a directory (and its parents) needs to be created under an allowed root. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusion cases, but the action is simple and the sibling tool names are sufficiently distinct.

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