Create Company Action Plan Template Section

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds that it returns the created object on success (HTTP 201), which is useful but not critical. No contradictions are present, and no additional behavioral details (e.g., side effects, auth needs) are provided beyond the 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 relatively concise at four sentences, covering purpose, required parameters, and API context. It includes relevant endpoint and success status, but has minor repetition ('Creates a new Action Plans' appears twice).

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 creation tool with three required parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks context about what a 'Company Action Plan Template Section' is, prerequisites (e.g., template must exist), or potential error states. The information is sufficient but not complete.

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 input schema provides 100% parameter descriptions, so the description's mention of required parameters is redundant. It adds no new meaning beyond the schema, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'Creates' and the resource 'Company Action Plan Template Section', making the primary purpose unambiguous. However, it contains a minor inconsistency by later referring to 'Action Plans' instead of 'template sections', which could cause slight confusion.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among many sibling tools like 'create_company_action_plan_templates' and 'create_action_plan_section', there is no explanation of when this specific tool is appropriate, leaving the agent without decision context.

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