tracecat_create_case_field

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description only states that the field 'appears on every case', which hints at a global effect but lacks details on side effects (e.g., does it affect existing cases?), permissions required, or idempotency. For a creation tool, more transparency is needed.

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 is concise and front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every word contributes to understanding, with no redundant or filler content.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, and the presence of 6 parameters including a conditional 'options' for select type, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the return value, the effect on existing cases, required permissions, or how to properly use the 'options' parameter for select fields.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds a list of common types that reinforces the field_type parameter, but does not provide additional semantic information beyond what the schema offers. Baseline score 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 clearly states the action ('Define a new custom case field') and scope ('appears on every case'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like tracecat_create_case which creates a case itself, and tracecat_create_case_task which creates a task within a case.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description implies that this tool is for fields that should be present on all cases, but it does not mention alternatives or prerequisites. The purpose is sufficiently clear for an agent to infer basic usage.

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