directus_create_panel

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

No annotations provided, yet description fails to disclose mutation behavior, idempotency characteristics, error conditions, or return structure. Does not explain what 'options' parameter accepts or valid values for 'type' despite carrying full behavioral disclosure burden.

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?

Single sentence is efficiently structured but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix constitutes noise without adding value. While brief, the extreme brevity is inappropriate for the parameter complexity, making it under-sized rather than appropriately concise.

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?

Severely incomplete for a mutation tool with 12 undocumented parameters and no output schema. Missing: valid panel types, positioning grid system explanation, options format, and success/failure indicators. Falls short of minimum viable documentation for safe invocation.

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 across 12 parameters, the description completely fails to compensate by explaining critical parameters like 'site' (instance identifier?), 'type' (valid panel types?), 'options' (JSON format?), or the coordinate system for positioning. No semantic guidance provided whatsoever.

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 specific verb (Create) and resource (panel) with contextual scope ('in a dashboard'), distinguishing it from sibling directus_create_dashboard which creates the container rather than components within it. However, lacks specificity about what constitutes a 'panel' in Directus (visualization, metric, chart, etc.).

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 tool versus alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., requiring an existing dashboard), or workflow context. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata leakage without explanatory value.

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