Create Classification

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

The description adds that it 'returns the created object on success (HTTP 201)', providing behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false (write) and destructiveHint=false, so the description's added value is moderate; it does not discuss authorization needs or other side effects.

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 three sentences with some redundancy (e.g., 'Create a new Classification' and 'Use this to create a new Company Settings' are similar). It includes API endpoint details which are helpful but could be more 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?

For a simple create tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, required parameter, endpoint, and success code. It is adequate but lacks details on parameter constraints or error handling.

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 the baseline is 3. The description only mentions 'Required parameters: company_id', which is already in the schema. It adds no additional meaning or constraints for the other parameters.

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 'Create a new Classification' and specifies the context ('associated with the specified company', 'Company Settings in Procore'). The verb and resource are specific, and the description distinguishes from other tools by mentioning the company association and the API endpoint.

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 says 'Use this to create a new Company Settings in Procore' and notes the required parameter company_id. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or provide alternatives, such as distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'create_a_new_classification'.

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