rlm_swarm_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'create' but fails to mention side effects, prerequisites, permissions, or anything beyond the basic action. This is insufficient.

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 a single, clear sentence without extraneous words. However, it may be too brief given the complexity of the tool, but it remains concise and front-loaded.

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 the parameter count (4), nested objects, and lack of output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain input expectations, return values, or behavioral specifics, making it hard for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is only 25%, with most parameters lacking descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-level explanations, leaving agents unaware of what 'description', 'max_agents', or 'config' mean. This is a critical gap.

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 the tool creates a new agent swarm with the context of multi-agent coordination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like rlm_swarm_update and rlm_swarm_join, but could be more specific about the swarm's role.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rlm_swarm_update or when not to use it. The description implies creation but lacks contextual cues for decision-making.

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