Create build

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

Annotations only provide destructiveHint: false. The description adds the default behavior of version (defaults to first product version) and that version can be a name or id. However, it does not address other behavioral aspects like product defaults (though the schema mentions KIWI_PROJECT), is_active default, or what the response contains. Given the sparse annotations, the description carries some but not full burden.

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 immediately states the function ('Build.create') and essential parameters. It is concise with no filler or redundancy.

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?

With four parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not explain the product default (KIWI_PROJECT, which is only in the schema), the is_active parameter behavior, or what the tool returns upon creation. For a create operation, an agent might need more context on response and defaults.

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 already covers all four parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying that the version parameter accepts either a name or an id, and that it defaults to the first product version. This goes beyond the schema's 'Version value or id' but does not add further semantics for other parameters.

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 'Build.create' with a specific verb and resource, and explains the required inputs (name plus version). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kiwi_list_builds (listing) and kiwi_create_version (creating versions).

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 usage context is implicit: it's a creation tool. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it instead of alternatives like kiwi_create_version or kiwi_list_builds. The description implies the tool is for creating a build, but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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