Collaborator: Create Remote System Configuration

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

The description states 'Creates a remote system configuration', which implies a write operation. However, annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating the tool is read-only. This is a direct contradiction. Additionally, idempotentHint=true may not align with typical create behavior. The description does not clarify the contradiction or the actual side effects.

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 of moderate length, including a 'Toolset' line and a parameter list. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the parameter list repeats the schema information, and the structure could be more streamlined (e.g., no need to re-list parameters if already in schema).

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 annotation contradiction and lack of output schema, the description fails to provide complete context. It does not explain what the tool returns, any side effects (despite readOnlyHint), or how to handle errors. For a creation tool, more behavioral context is expected.

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?

The input schema covers all parameters with 100% description coverage. The description lists the same parameters and adds minor examples (e.g., BITBUCKET for token), but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. No extra constraints or formatting details are given for the 'config' JSON string.

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 clearly states it creates a remote system configuration for Collaborator, with examples like Bitbucket, GitHub. The verb 'creates' and resource 'remote system configuration' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'edit' or 'delete', though the name implies creation.

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 (e.g., edit, delete, test connection). The description does not mention prerequisites, scenarios, or when not to use it. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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