create-label

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the transparency burden. It explicitly states this is a write operation that changes PCE state and explains the approval-gating behavior in clients, including the key caveat that the call must not be retried while waiting. This is valuable behavioral disclosure beyond the schema.

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?

Two sentences and no filler. The first sentence states the action, and the second delivers a necessary operational warning. Well front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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?

The definition covers side effects and approval handling, which is important for a write operation. However, with 0% schema coverage and no explanation of key/value semantics, valid label types, response behavior, or potential uniqueness constraints, the description is not fully self-sufficient for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented key and value parameters. It mentions 'a specific type and the value' but never explicitly maps type to the key parameter or defines allowed/formatted values. An agent would struggle to confidently populate the parameters.

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 names a concrete operation—'create a label'—with a resource (label) and context (PCE). It is not a tautology and is distinguishable from update-label and delete-label. However, the phrase 'a specific type and the value' is slightly vague and does not explicitly say key/value.

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 about when to choose create-label over update-label or delete-label, and names no alternatives or preconditions. The retry warning is about post-invocation behavior, not tool selection.

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