Creates Requested Change

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

Annotations already indicate it's not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent. The description adds that it returns HTTP 201 and the created object, which is sufficient but does not disclose side effects beyond creation.

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 moderately concise with 4 sentences, but includes grammatical errors and redundant API info. It could be tighter without losing meaning.

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 exists; the description mentions return of created object but not its shape. It omits error handling and prerequisites, leaving some gaps for a 6-parameter tool.

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 description only redundantly lists required parameters. It does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 requested change for a Task on Schedule (Legacy) records. The verb 'Creates' and the specific resource 'requested changes' are well-defined. However, minor grammatical issues slightly reduce 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 specifies when to use this tool ('for Schedule (Legacy) records') but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. The guidance is moderate.

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