Create Location (Admin)

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

Description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: requires admin permissions, bypasses a project configuration, returns the created object with HTTP 201. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description correctly frames this as a mutation with additive behavior.

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?

Description contains redundant and slightly inaccurate phrases, such as 'Use this to create a new Project records' and 'Creates a new Project records', which are repeated. The essential information could be conveyed in two concise sentences.

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 the tool has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: permissions, configuration override, and HTTP success status. However, it lacks details on error conditions, response structure (though none provided), and potential duplicate handling. The confusion about 'Project records' also undermines completeness.

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 already describes all three parameters with 100% coverage. The description only repeats that project_id is required and mentions the endpoint structure, adding no new semantic meaning for node_name or parent_id. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it creates a new location for a project. It mentions the required admin permission and configuration override, hinting at a distinction from the sibling 'create_location' tool. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings, and there is a minor confusion referring to 'Project records' instead of locations.

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?

Description provides context on when to use this tool: requires Project Admin permissions and can bypass the 'Disable Dynamic Location Creation' setting. This helps differentiate usage, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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