Create Project Checklist Template

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

The description states it creates and returns the created object with HTTP 201, reinforcing the write behavior. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds the HTTP status but does not disclose additional traits like required permissions, side effects, or rate limits.

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 four sentences, but the first two are redundant ('Creates a Project Inspection Template...' and 'Use this to create a new Inspections...'). It includes API details which are helpful but could be more compact. Score reflects acceptable but not optimal conciseness.

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 creation tool with a nested object parameter (list_template) and no output schema, the description lacks important details. It does not explain what fields list_template should contain, nor does it describe the return structure. The API endpoint is provided, but the agent would need additional context to use this tool correctly.

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 all parameters are described. The description only lists the required parameters (project_id, list_template) and mentions the endpoint. It does not add meaningful information beyond the schema, which already provides descriptions. 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?

The description clearly states it creates a Project Inspection Template, which is a checklist template. It specifies the required parameters and the API endpoint. However, it confusingly says 'Use this to create a new Inspections' which blurs the line between template and inspection, slightly reducing clarity.

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 gives minimal guidance on when to use this tool. It says 'Use this to create a new Inspections' but does not differentiate from sibling tools like create_checklist_inspection or create_company_checklist_template. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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