create_intent

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

Annotations indicate mutability (readOnlyHint=false) and openness; description adds usage of dryRun parameter and subsequent training need. Does not contradict annotations. Could further detail side effects like uniqueness constraints but schema handles that.

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 concise sentences: first states purpose, second gives key behavioral details and next step. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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 10 parameters (2 required) and no output schema, description covers essential aspects: purpose, mutability, dry run workflow, and post-creation training. Could mention return value (e.g., intent object) but not required.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining dryRun's purpose (validate vs. create) and the training step, which provides extra context beyond schema.

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?

Clearly specifies verb 'creates' and resource 'intent in a Cognigy.AI flow for NLU recognition', clearly differentiating from sibling tools like update_intent and delete_intent.

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?

Explicitly states mutating nature, recommends using dryRun=true for validation, and instructs to use train_intents after creation. Provides clear workflow guidance.

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