Create Module

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it states 'This adds a new row to NetBox,' confirming a create operation, and describes the output format (Markdown or JSON). Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so no contradiction; the description adds useful detail.

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 (4 sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value (purpose, dry-run caution, return format). No fluff, but could be more structured.

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 (10 parameters, 2 required, no output schema), the description covers purpose, a usage caveat, and output format. However, it lacks details on parameter relationships (e.g., module_bay and module_type) and does not explain the module concept or error states. It is minimally adequate.

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 input schema has 10 parameters with 50% description coverage. The tool description does not add any parameter-level meaning; it only mentions the response_format in the output context. Since the description does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation, the score is below baseline.

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 module in NetBox,' specifying the action (create) and resource (module). It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like netbox_create_module_bay or netbox_create_module_type, but the name and action are sufficiently clear.

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 provides a usage hint: 'Ask before calling if the user wanted a dry-run.' This suggests caution but does not elaborate on when to use this tool instead of alternatives or provide exclusions. Some guidance exists but is incomplete.

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