create_change_request

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

The description adds the WRITE_ENABLED=true requirement, which is a behavioral prerequisite beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't disclose other behavioral traits such as what happens on success, whether an approval is triggered, or what the return value is.

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 that quickly states the action and a key prerequisite, with no filler or redundant information.

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 15 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how the 'type' field affects behavior, or any post-creation steps. The WRITE_ENABLED hint is useful but insufficient for a complex creation tool.

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?

All 15 parameters are described in the input schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Create' with a clear resource 'change request', making the tool's purpose immediately obvious and distinct from sibling tools like update_change_request or list_change_requests.

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 prerequisite (WRITE_ENABLED=true) but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives like update_change_request. The usage is implied by the verb 'Create', but there is no explicit exclusion or comparison.

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