create_disclosure

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool 'creates' a disclosure, implying mutation, but does not mention permissions, reversibility, side effects, or output structure. The phrase 'controls how much info is revealed' adds a bit of context but is insufficient for a create operation.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences that convey the tool's purpose without waste. Every word contributes to meaning, making it highly concise and appropriately structured.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate. The parameter is fully covered by the schema, and the description explains the core concept. However, it could be more complete by mentioning the intended context or expected output, but for a simple create operation with full schema coverage, it is close to complete.

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% (the 'level' parameter is fully documented with enum values and descriptions). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it merely reinforces that the level controls revelation. Since the schema already carries the parameter semantics, a 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 a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('selective disclosure of principal identity'), clearly indicating the tool's function. It also adds 'Controls how much info is revealed' to clarify the tool's effect. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like 'issue_passport' or 'identify', which could serve related purposes.

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 one needs to create a selective disclosure and control information revelation, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. This is an implicit usage cue rather than direct instruction.

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