adt_create_dataelement

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

Without annotations, the description effectively discloses key behaviors: type derivation, label length handling, package and activation defaults, and return values. It does not cover error scenarios or authentication, but the core behavioral traits are well explained.

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, dense paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, behavior, and key parameter nuances. It is front-loaded with the core action and follows with relevant details. While not structured with bullet points, it remains concise and scannable.

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 complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, behavioral details, label defaults, return values, and naming constraints. Missing are explicit error conditions and prerequisites (e.g., domain existence), but the overall completeness is high.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable context beyond schema descriptions, particularly the default label lengths and behavior when longer labels are supplied. This helps an agent understand parameter constraints without relying solely on the schema.

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 verb 'create', the resource 'DDIC data element (DTEL)', and key differentiators like referencing an existing domain and automatic type derivation. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like adt_create_domain by specifying the reliance on a pre-existing domain.

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 implies usage when needing a data element based on a domain, mentioning the package default ($TMP) and naming convention. It lacks an explicit statement of when not to use or direct comparison to alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear for an agent.

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