macro_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Create a Macro object' and mentions optional text; it does not disclose overwrite behavior, checkpoint implications, default macro_type, or what happens when a macro already exists. These are important for a potentially destructive create operation.

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 single, direct sentence with no filler or redundant explanation. It is front-loaded with the core action, though it is arguably too terse given the tool's five parameters and safety-related options.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and five parameters including overwrite and allow_without_checkpoint, this description is incomplete. It omits critical context about macro_path format, default macro type, overwrite safety, and checkpoint behavior. The agent must rely heavily on the schema and outside knowledge to invoke it correctly.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by restating 'text content', but it does not explain the required macro_path parameter, which is the one parameter lacking a schema description. Overall, the schema carries most of the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('Macro object'), and mentions the optional text content. It distinguishes this creation tool from siblings like macro_get_text and macro_set_text, though it does not call out object_create as the generic alternative or mention the required macro_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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives such as object_create, macro_set_text, or model_get_macros. The description simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer when creation is appropriate and what preconditions or path requirements apply.

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