Create client

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the important detail that fields must use the _1/_2 borrower naming convention from docs/client-fields.md, which is not visible in the schema.

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 two compact sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded. Every sentence adds value, referencing the field naming convention without excess.

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?

For an open-world create tool with a single flexible params object and no output schema, the description covers the main complexity: how to structure field names. It gives examples and points to a doc file, making it sufficient for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 only describes 'params' as an object of fields passed to Smart NPV. The description adds specific examples (firstname_1, phone_1, income_1) and directs to documentation, significantly enriching the meaning for correct invocation.

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 'Create a new client' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_client and delete_client.

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 when to use (creating a new client) but lacks explicit exclusion or alternative comparisons. It does provide guidance on structuring fields inside params, which is helpful for invocation.

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