create_layout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the critical requirement that html_wrapper must embed {{{ content }}} and that anything else is refused with ValidationError, which is valuable. However, it does not mention mutation effects, permissions, idempotency, or response behavior, leaving gaps for a create operation.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the critical validation constraint follows immediately. Every word serves a purpose.

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 a create tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential validation gotcha but omits return value expectations, error handling beyond ValidationError, and any prerequisites or side effects. The 100% schema coverage compensates for parameter details, leaving a moderate completeness level.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine semantic value by specifying the enforcement of the placeholder requirement and the resulting ValidationError, which the schema does not convey. This extra clarity on html_wrapper justifies a 4.

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 a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('template layout'), distinguishing it from sibling layout operations like update_layout, get_layout, and delete_layout. The additional detail about html_wrapper validation reinforces the tool's identity without ambiguity.

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 guidance is provided about when to use create_layout versus other layout tools or when the optional permalink/text_wrapper parameters should be set. The single validation rule is not a substitute for usage context or alternatives.

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