create_script_include

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

Annotations already disclose the non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive nature. The description adds the scripting-enabled requirement, which is useful operational context beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions 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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and a concise prerequisite in parentheses. It contains no filler or redundancy, making it appropriately concise.

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 rich schema and annotations, the description is mostly sufficient for a simple create operation. However, since there is no output schema, a brief mention of the return format or failure behavior would have been beneficial. This is a minor gap.

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 covers 100% of parameters with detailed descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 script include' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this from siblings like get_script_include, update_script_include, and list_script_includes. The added prerequisite '(requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true)' further clarifies the operation's context.

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 clear prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true) that an agent needs to know before invoking the tool. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the action is unambiguous and the prerequisite gives solid usage context.

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