create_resource_feedback

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only implies a mutation via 'create' but does not describe side effects, whether duplicates are allowed, permissions required, idempotency, or the response format. This is a significant gap for a create operation.

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 extremely short ('Create a resource feedback'), but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It provides only the basic action and object without any useful elaboration, so it does not earn its place as a sufficient description.

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 has 4 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not cover return values, side effects, or usage context. The schema explains parameters, but the overall context is insufficient for an agent to use the 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all four parameters, including enum values and an example for resourceId. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 the action ('create') and the object ('resource feedback'), which distinguishes it from sibling 'get_resource_feedbacks'. However, it does not explain what a resource feedback is, its purpose, or how it relates to the parameters, leaving the purpose somewhat vague.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention the sibling get_resource_feedbacks or any preconditions, making it hard for an agent to decide when to invoke this tool.

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