nr_create_nodes

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation creates nodes/groups, includes details about required fields (id, type, z) and special cases (config nodes use 'z': ''). It does not mention auth needs or error conditions, but for a creation tool it provides adequate transparency.

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 two sentences with no waste. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second provides essential detail. Every sentence earns its place, making it appropriately concise.

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 presence of an output schema (so return values are covered), the description adequately explains the main parameter and special cases. It lacks information on prerequisites or error conditions, but for a creation tool, it is complete enough for typical use.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning to the 'nodes' parameter by listing required fields and explaining group and config node usage. The 'description' parameter is not explained, but it is optional and default null, so the overall param semantics are well-covered.

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 the action ('Create') and the resource ('nodes/groups'). It also specifies the required fields for each node dict, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like nr_delete_nodes or nr_inject. The verb-resource pair is specific and unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for creating nodes in a deploy, which is clear. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., nr_install_module for modules) or when not to use it. The context is sufficient but lacks exclusions.

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