hamravesh_create_app

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the tool is a write operation, has a dry-run mode, and is disabled by default (needs HAMRAVESH_ALLOW_WRITE=1). However, it does not discuss side effects like billing, idempotency, or required permissions beyond the disabled flag.

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 paragraph that efficiently conveys purpose, required context, and configuration flags. It is front-loaded with the main action. No extra words, but the structure could be slightly improved with clearer separation of notes.

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 14 parameters (7 required) and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core creation logic and pre-requisites. However, it lacks information about return values, error conditions, or post-creation behavior, which would be beneficial for full completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, but the description adds value by explaining how to derive values for plan, namespace, and organization from hamravesh_get_app, and notes that the name is immutable after creation. This goes beyond listing parameter names.

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 it creates a new Docker-image app in Darkub, with specific resource types (plan, namespace, organization) required. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like hamravesh_create_database or hamravesh_create_saas, which create different resources.

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 tells the agent to obtain plan, namespace, and organization from hamravesh_get_app, providing a clear usage pattern. It also mentions dry_run and write permission flags. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, but the context is sufficient for differentiation.

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