Create an agent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds nothing new beyond echoing the POST endpoint. It does not disclose whether an account/queue must exist first, whether duplicates are rejected, or what the call returns for the new agent.

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?

Two short fragments with zero padding, and the verb is front-loaded. However, the brevity is under-specification rather than economy — the parenthetical endpoint is the only added information.

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?

For a non-idempotent write tool with 8 parameters, 4 of them required, and no output schema, the description should at minimum state the resulting object and any prerequisites. It provides neither, leaving the agent to infer everything from an endpoint path.

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 technically 100%, but the per-parameter text is pure boilerplate ('Body field name.', 'Body field extension_sip.'), so no real semantics are conveyed anywhere. The description does not explain the required name/extension_type/extension_sip/extension_pstn relationship, the Superviser/Agent enum intent, or the response_format switch.

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 essentially restates the title ('Create an agent') and appends the raw endpoint path (POST /call_center_agents). The endpoint hints at the Call Center Agents resource family, but the text never says what an 'agent' is here or how it differs from the many other create tools in the sibling list (create_user, create_sip_user, create_contact).

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 when-to-use guidance at all. Nothing distinguishes this from placetel_list_call_center_agents, placetel_update_call_center_agent, or the other user/SIP-user creation tools, and no preconditions are stated.

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