Create a client

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=false already indicates a mutation, and the description is consistent with that. It adds the workspace scope, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as uniqueness constraints, permissions, or side effects. Since annotations cover the basic safety profile, this is acceptable but not enriched.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a simple create operation and does not waste tokens or introduce unnecessary detail.

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?

For a simple 4-parameter create tool, the description is minimally viable: it clearly states the action and resource. However, it lacks usage guidance, parameter elaboration for half the parameters, and any mention of return value or potential errors. The schema and annotations fill some gaps, but the description remains thin.

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 schema describes only 'name' and 'workspace_id' (50% coverage), and the description does not compensate for the undocumented 'note' and 'address' parameters. The agent receives no semantic guidance for two of four parameters, and the description adds nothing beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Adds a client to the workspace' uses a specific verb (adds) and clearly identifies the resource (client) and scope (workspace). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create_project or create_task, and adds workspace context not present in the tool name or title.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_client, delete_client, or list_clients. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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