Create Plan Revision Log

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive. The description adds only that it returns HTTP 201 and the created object. No additional behavioral traits (e.g., side effects, auth needs, rate limits) are disclosed, adding minimal value beyond 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 slightly repetitive (mentions 'Creates' twice) and includes a typo ('records'). It includes useful endpoint info but could be more concise. Structure is acceptable with purpose first, then link, then details.

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?

No output schema is provided; description states only that the created object is returned. For a simple create tool with full schema coverage, this is adequate but missing details on error handling or attachment upload specifics. Sibling context helps, but completeness is limited.

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 description coverage is 100%, fully describing all three parameters. The description redundantly lists required parameters and mentions the link for attachments, but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what's in the schema.

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 ('Creates single Plan Revision Log') and the resource, distinguishing it from other daily log tools. It explicitly says it creates a Daily Log record, leaving no ambiguity.

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 a link to the Daily Log guide for attachment details but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. It implies usage for plan revision logs but lacks direct guidance on tool selection.

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