aws_resource_create

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false, etc. The description adds critical behavioral context: async by default, returns ProgressEvent with operation status, need to poll or use awaitCompletion. This goes beyond annotations and clarifies the full lifecycle.

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 concise (3 sentences), front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence provides essential information. No unnecessary words, well-structured for quick reading.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the return format (ProgressEvent), token usage, and polling mechanics. It covers async/sync options and timeout parameters. Lacks mention of error handling or failure modes, but overall provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 100% with good descriptions. The description adds context for key parameters like desiredState (matching CFN schema), async polling parameters (awaitCompletion, pollIntervalMs, maxWaitMs), and explains their interaction. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: creating an AWS resource via Cloud Control API. It includes specific verb ('Create') and resource ('AWS resource'), and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning the async nature and Cloud Control API approach. Examples and async details further clarify.

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 explains when to use the tool (to create a resource) and provides guidance on the async vs sync behavior via awaitCompletion. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to siblings, but the async pattern is well-explained, making the usage clear for most cases.

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