komodo_create_stack

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about permissions required, side effects, whether creation is idempotent, or what happens on name collision. The only behavioral hint is a generic 'Returns: Created stack information'.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and economical, but the boilerplate Args/Returns block adds almost no information for its length, and 'Args: config: Stack configuration dictionary' is pure restatement.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, a nested free-form object parameter, and zero schema coverage, the description is far too thin. The output schema covers returns, but nothing compensates for the undocumented creation semantics and config shape.

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 single parameter 'config' is an arbitrary object with 0% schema description coverage, and the description only restates it as 'Stack configuration dictionary'. No keys, expected fields, or format are given, so the agent cannot construct a valid config from the description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new stack'), which is unambiguous and separable from siblings like komodo_create_deployment or komodo_create_build by resource name. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with komodo_create_stack's natural siblings beyond the noun.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., authentication via komodo_login, needing an existing server). The agent must infer context entirely.

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