addSuite

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the creation action without mentioning required permissions, side effects, idempotency, return values, or error scenarios. This is minimal for a mutation 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 very short, with one sentence per language. It is efficient and front-loaded, but could potentially include more useful information without significantly increasing length.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain what happens on success, error conditions, or how this tool relates to other tools like addRun or addSection. A more comprehensive description is needed for an unannotated tool.

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?

The input schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score 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 clearly states it creates a new test suite in a specified project, using a specific verb ('Creates') and resource ('test suite'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like addCase, addPlan, etc., which create different entities.

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 for creating a suite, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., updateSuite for modifying, or addSection for adding sections). No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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