Create Password

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false), the description discloses that the created record is returned including the assigned id, and that validation failures produce a 422 response naming the offending field. This adds useful behavioral context about return value and error handling. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core action and stays reasonably concise. It includes valuable context about what a Hudu password is and gives return/error behavior. The 'Operation class: Create' line is somewhat redundant with the first sentence but not harmful.

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 13 parameters, no output schema, and basic annotations, the description is fairly complete. It explains the resource concept, return value, and error behavior. Parameter details are delegated to the schema, which is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%. It could improve by adding usage guidance versus update/list, but overall it covers the create operation well.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions optional attachment to an asset/website, but that concept is already in the passwordable_type/id descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Create a new password in Hudu.' It further clarifies what a password record is and even distinguishes between API naming ('AssetPassword') and UI naming ('Passwords'). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like hudu_update_password or hudu_archive_password.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives. There is no guidance like 'Use this when adding a new credential rather than updating an existing one' or mention of prerequisites such as resolving company_id. Some implied usage exists ('Create a new password'), but no explicit context or exclusions.

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