create_webex_space

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral transparency. It discloses that is_locked and is_moderated are the same property and lists the return type, but it does not mention required permissions, rate limits, or potential side effects of creating a space. This is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 well-structured with a clear main sentence, an alias note, a detailed argument list, and a return value statement. Every sentence contributes valuable information. It is appropriately sized for the complexity of the tool, though the argument list could be slightly more compact.

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 the tool has 8 parameters (1 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the basics but lacks deeper contextual completeness. It explains parameters and the alias, but does not describe what a 'space' is, the effects of parameters like is_locked or is_public, or how to interpret the return dictionary. This leaves some gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides a brief explanation for each parameter (e.g., 'title of the space (required)', 'team_id to create space in (optional)'), and clarifies the relationship between is_locked and is_moderated. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema names, though it could elaborate on the effects of parameters like is_public or classification_id.

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 'Create a new Webex space' and notes it is an alias for create_webex_room, making the action and resource unambiguous. It also distinguishes the tool from its sibling by explaining the synonymy of 'room' and 'space'.

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 explicitly states this is an alias for create_webex_room, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus its direct sibling. However, it does not offer guidance on when to use this tool over other creation tools like create_webex_webhook or create_webex_team, limiting context for alternative choices.

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