acr_create_registry

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that the registry name must be globally unique, which is a constraint. However, it does not address side effects (e.g., cost, idempotency) or error conditions like if the registry already exists.

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 concise, with a clear first sentence followed by a bulleted list of parameters. There is no wasted text, but the structure could be improved by front-loading more critical information.

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 presence of an output schema and 5 parameters, the description covers parameter semantics well. However, it lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., resource group must exist) and does not mention when to choose this over other registry management tools.

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 description provides meaningful descriptions for all 5 parameters, including defaults and the uniqueness requirement for registry_name. Since the input schema has no descriptions, this adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 starts with 'Create a new container registry', which is a clear verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like acr_delete_registry and acr_update_registry by focusing on creation.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. The purpose is clear, but the description does not state when not to use it or mention prerequisites such as the resource group needing to exist.

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