create_callout_extensions

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates that the tool creates extensions, implying mutation, but provides no additional transparency about side effects, permission requirements, idempotency, or impact on existing resources. This is a significant gap for a creation 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 a single short sentence with no fluff, making it concise. However, it is under-specified rather than appropriately detailed, omitting essential context. It is front-loaded but not sufficiently informative.

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and the minimal description, the tool is incomplete. An agent cannot determine what callout extensions are, how to structure the callouts parameter, or how this tool relates to similar extension-creation tools. The description leaves critical gaps 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?

The input schema describes customerId but leaves callouts undefined. The description adds no meaning to the parameters, failing to explain what calloutText represents or what structure the callouts array should follow. With only 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 action (create) and the resource (callout extensions), which distinguishes it from unrelated tools. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like create_callout_assets or create_call_extensions, making the purpose clear but not uniquely distinct.

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 like create_callout_assets or create_sitelink_extensions. It lacks any context about prerequisites, use cases, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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