Create New Delay Log Type

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

The description discloses the HTTP response code (201) and that it returns the created object. The annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. There is no mention of permissions, side effects, or error states. This is adequate but not enhanced by the description 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 short and front-loaded with the key information. However, it contains slight redundancy ('Create a new Delay Log Type' vs 'create a new Daily Log records') and could be streamlined. Overall, it's efficient.

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 there is no output schema, the description should ideally outline the response structure or mention the 'visible' parameter. It is sufficient for a simple creation tool but leaves room for improvement. The agent would need to infer the response format from the endpoint documentation.

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 has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add new semantic meaning beyond listing the required parameters. It fails to mention the optional 'visible' parameter, which could be important for the agent.

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 action ('Create a new Delay Log Type') and the resource ('for the project'), making the tool's primary purpose obvious. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from its sibling 'create_delay_log' (which creates an actual delay log entry), leading to potential confusion for an AI agent choosing between them.

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. With a vast sibling list including 'create_delay_log', 'list_delay_log_types', and 'update_a_delay_log_type', the absence of usage conditions or exclusions makes it harder for an agent to select the correct tool. It only mentions 'Use this to create a new Daily Log records' which is vague.

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