directus_create_version

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

No annotations provided, yet description discloses no behavioral traits: it omits permission requirements (admin vs editor), whether this overwrites existing drafts, idempotency, or the effect on the main item. 'Draft' hints at state but doesn't explain the versioning lifecycle.

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 brief, but the leading '[UNIFIED]' tag is structural clutter that doesn't serve the agent. The parenthetical '(draft)' is efficient but slightly ambiguous—front-loading could be improved by removing metadata noise.

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 inadequate for a 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations or output schema. Lacks explanation of return values, error conditions, or the relationship between the created version and the parent item identified by collection+item.

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 5 required parameters (site, name, collection, item, key), the description must compensate but mentions none. Critical semantics like whether 'key' is user-defined or system-generated, and what 'site' refers to, are completely absent.

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 the core action ('Create') and resource ('content version/draft') but prefixes unexplained metadata '[UNIFIED]' that creates noise. Distinguishes from 'create_item' siblings by mentioning 'version/draft', yet fails to clarify the Directus-specific versioning workflow or scope constraints.

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 zero guidance on when to use versus alternatives. Does not mention sibling tools like directus_promote_version (which would promote this draft to main) or directus_update_version, nor prerequisites like requiring an existing item to version.

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