bolna_create_sub_account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'enterprise feature' and 'multi-tenant management', but does not explain side effects (e.g., creation of resources, isolation), required permissions, or what happens after creation (e.g., no explanation of the sub-account lifecycle).

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary action. It is free of extraneous text, earning a high score, though it lacks structural elements like lists or bullet points which could improve scannability.

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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, prerequisites, or typical usage flow. It provides minimal context beyond the basic purpose.

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% with meaningful parameter descriptions. The description adds overarching context about enterprise and multi-tenancy but does not add new semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies as schema already does the lifting.

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' and the resource 'sub-account', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete, patch, list sub-account tools. It also specifies the context 'enterprise multi-tenant management', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 it's for enterprise multi-tenant scenarios, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to create sub-account vs create agent). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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