create_update_set

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly=false and destructive=false, and the description adds the optional switch behavior, which is a side effect beyond simple creation. The '[Scripting]' tag also provides context about intended usage. 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 a single, direct sentence with no filler. It includes the essential action and an optional behavior, plus a brief context tag. Every word earns its place.

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 simple create operation, the schema fully documents parameters, and annotations cover safety, the description is sufficient. It could mention return values, but this is not critical for a create tool and the openWorldHint and sibling tools provide additional context.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and all parameters are already described in the input schema. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb 'Create' and resource 'Update Set', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_update_sets, switch_update_set, and complete_update_set. The optional switch behavior is also stated.

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 purpose implies when to use the tool (to create an update set), but there is no explicit guidance about alternatives or when not to use it. Siblings like switch_update_set exist, but the description does not mention them.

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