Create Affliction Type

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds that it returns the created object on HTTP 201, but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, or behavior beyond creation. This adds minimal value over annotations.

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 repetitive (mentions 'Creates a new Incidents' twice) and contains grammatical errors ('a Affliction Type'). It is not well-structured and could be significantly shortened and clarified.

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?

The description omits the optional 'active' parameter, does not explain the relationship to incidents clearly, and lacks guidance on when this tool is the correct choice among many sibling create tools. This leaves gaps for an AI agent.

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 schema has 100% coverage with parameter descriptions. The description repeats which parameters are required but adds no additional meaning or context beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high coverage.

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 tool creates an affliction type with a specified name, referencing the parent resource 'Incidents'. However, it confusingly says 'create a new Incidents' which is inaccurate and could mislead an agent about the exact resource being created.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_incident' or 'bulk_update_affliction_types'. It mentions required parameters but does not specify context or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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