Create Resource

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint: false) and non-destructive. The description adds that it returns the created object on HTTP 201, which is consistent but adds little 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 somewhat redundant (mentions creating 'Schedule (Legacy) records' twice) and includes a parameter duplication typo. It could be more concise, but the structure is logical and front-loaded.

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?

The tool creates a resource with an open-ended 'resource' object (additionalProperties: true) but the description does not explain what a resource should contain or any prerequisites. There is no output schema, so the agent lacks information on the return structure. This is incomplete given the complexity.

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%, and the schema already describes both parameters. The description merely repeats 'project_id, project_id, resource' without adding additional meaning or constraints beyond 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 'Create a new Resource associated with the specified Project' and identifies it as part of 'Schedule (Legacy)' with a specific endpoint. It distinguishes the resource from other concepts but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'create_resource_v1_0' tool.

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 says 'Use this to create a new Schedule (Legacy) records' which implies a specific use case but provides no when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives. The required parameters are listed, though with a typo duplication.

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