directus_create_field

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It implies mutation via 'Create' but fails to disclose idempotency behavior, whether this triggers schema changes in the underlying database, or potential destructive side effects. No mention of return values or error conditions.

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?

Brief and front-loaded, but the '[UNIFIED]' tag appears to be metadata noise rather than helpful context. Single sentence structure prevents elaboration needed for parameter documentation.

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?

Grossly inadequate for a complex schema mutation tool with 6 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no annotations. A field creation tool requires explanation of data types, meta configuration, and schema overrides—none of which are addressed.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description completely fails to compensate. Critical parameters like 'site' (instance identifier?), 'type' (data type enumeration?), 'meta' and 'schema' (likely JSON configuration strings) are entirely undocumented, leaving users to guess their semantics and formats.

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?

States basic verb (Create) and resource (field in a collection), distinguishing from siblings like directus_create_collection or directus_create_item. However, lacks domain context about what a 'field' represents (schema column vs content) and the '[UNIFIED]' prefix adds noise without clarifying scope.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus directus_update_field, prerequisites (collection must exist), or what happens if the field already exists. No mention of permissions or validation requirements.

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