vapi_create_tool

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

With no annotations and a minimal description, behavioral traits are not disclosed. The description does not mention whether creation is reversible, if authentication is required, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a creation tool.

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loaded. However, it is too terse, sacrificing necessary detail for brevity.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, and the complexity of parameters (4 properties, nested objects), the description is grossly inadequate. It fails to explain what a 'Vapi tool' is or how to correctly populate the schema.

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 0%, and the description provides no parameter details. The schema includes nested objects like 'function' and 'server' without explanation, leaving the agent to guess their meaning.

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 ('Create') and the resource ('a new Vapi tool'), providing a clear purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like vapi_create_assistant or vapi_create_call, so it is not a 5.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vapi_update_tool or vapi_delete_tool. There is no context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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