preview_supershift_cloud_crud

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

The description states the tool is 'experimental' and that it does 'not send' the payload, but it does not disclose whether any side effects occur (e.g., validation checks, temporary storage) or what the output contains. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, which it fails to meet.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it is too vague. It lacks structure and key information, earning a middle score.

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 3 parameters, no annotations, an output schema, and many sibling tools, the description should provide detailed context about usage, parameters, and output. It falls short, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 defines 3 parameters (shifts, event_type, calendar_id) but the description provides no explanation of their meaning or format. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not even mention the parameters.

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 the tool's purpose: to build a preview of a Supershift Cloud v3/crud payload without sending it. The verb 'preview' and the resource 'Supershift Cloud v3/crud payload' are specific, but it does not differentiate from sibling preview tools like preview_supershift_write.

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 given on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., create_supershift_shifts vs preview_supershift_cloud_crud). An agent would not know when a preview is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.

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