air_create_assessment_draft

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; description adds behavioral context by stating it requires a write permission and does not start the pipeline. This goes beyond annotations and clarifies the tool's non-destructive yet write-requiring nature.

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?

Single sentence conveys purpose and a key constraint. No wasted words.

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, and description does not mention return values. It covers permission and scope but leaves the response behavior implicit. Adequate for a simple create action but could be more complete.

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 67% (projectPid lacks description). The tool description does not add any extra meaning to parameters beyond what the schema provides. For a moderate coverage, description should compensate but does not.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create an assessment draft without starting the pipeline' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like air_start_assessment and air_run_full_assessment_pipeline by emphasizing it does not start the pipeline.

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?

Explicitly says 'without starting the pipeline,' indicating when to use this tool (draft only). It also notes the required permission 'assessments:write.' While it does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, the sibling tools provide context.

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