gorelo_create_client

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write/non-destructive profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely new behavioral fact — that a default location is created as a side effect — but says nothing about what happens on duplicate names/domains, required auth scope, or what the response returns.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler, and the parenthetical side-effect is front-loaded before any other consideration. Nothing to trim.

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?

Given a rich, fully-described nested schema and annotations that cover the safety profile, the description is close to sufficient. However, for a creation tool with no output schema it omits what is returned (e.g. the new client ID) and any failure/duplicate conditions, which an agent would want before invoking.

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 100% and the nested Location object is thoroughly documented with per-field max lengths, so the schema carries nearly all parameter meaning. The description's only added value is clarifying that the Location object represents the client's default location, not an additional one.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ("Creates a client") and adds a meaningful scope detail: a default location is created alongside it. That distinguishes it clearly from read/update siblings like gorelo_get_client and gorelo_update_client, though it never explicitly contrasts with gorelo_list_clients or other create tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g. creating a client with locations separately via gorelo_list_client_locations), and no stated prerequisites, permissions, or duplicate-handling rules. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name.

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