vast42_create_companion

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It provides no information beyond the action itself, such as side effects, validation requirements, permissions, or what the response contains. This is essentially a restatement of the tool name.

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 extremely short (7 words) and front-loaded, but it is under-specified. It does not provide enough information for correct use. The single sentence is essentially a tautology of the tool name, lacking any useful expansion or structure.

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 create operation with no annotations and no output schema, this description is completely inadequate. It does not explain the domain context (e.g., what a 'VAST 4.2 companion' is), relationships to other entities, or any edge cases. The schema provides some param info but the description fails to give the full operational picture.

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 description coverage is 100% (name, width, height all have descriptions). The description adds no parameter details, but the schema already documents the parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy 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 states a clear verb ('Create') and a specific resource ('a VAST 4.2 companion'). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like vast42_get_companion or vast42_update_companion because it is the create operation. However, it does not elaborate on what a VAST 4.2 companion is or how it differs from creating other entities.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No context about prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing ad or creative) or any other conditions. The usage is only implied by the name, but the description provides no explicit direction.

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