create_load_balancer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers none. It does not address critical aspects like required permissions, rate limits, idempotency, or the impact of creation (e.g., costs, time to provision). This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 concise with a single, clear sentence. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, though this brevity contributes to its lack of detail.

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's complexity (6 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It does not compensate for the missing structured data, leaving the agent unable to understand how to use the tool effectively or what to expect from its execution.

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 0%, meaning all 6 parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description adds no parameter information beyond the tool name, failing to explain what 'algorithm', 'location', or other inputs mean or how they affect the load balancer creation.

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 'Create a new load balancer' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It specifies the verb ('create') and resource ('load balancer') but lacks differentiation from sibling tools like 'create_server' or 'create_network', failing to clarify what makes this creation distinct.

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. The description does not mention prerequisites, dependencies, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'add_load_balancer_service' or 'update_load_balancer', leaving the agent without context for selection.

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