autotask_create_ticket

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

The description states 'Create a new ticket,' indicating a mutation, but no annotations are provided. It does not disclose behavioral details such as required permissions, the effect on existing data, rate limits, or response format. The burden is on the description due to missing annotations, and it fails to add useful behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states the purpose. It is concise, but for a tool with many parameters and important dependencies (e.g., required resource role when resource is assigned), a slightly more detailed description could be beneficial. Still, it is well-structured and free of fluff.

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 tool's complexity (21 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal. It relies entirely on the schema for parameter details. While the schema covers dependencies like assignedResourceID/assignedResourceRoleID, the description does not mention typical use cases or emphasize required fields. It is minimally adequate but lacks completeness for a complex create tool.

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 itself adds no parameter information; however, the input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 21 parameters. Therefore, the description does not need to repeat this info. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new ticket in Autotask' uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('ticket'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like autotask_update_ticket or autotask_create_ticket_note. It accurately states the action and the system.

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 implies the tool is for creating a new ticket, which differentiates it from update tools like autotask_update_ticket. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as creating a ticket note or a task. No usage context is given beyond the basic action.

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