commands_create_global

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

The description discloses upsert semantics ('posting the same name+type updates the existing command') which goes beyond the idempotentHint annotation. It also reveals propagation delay and type-specific requirements for description, adding behavioral context not visible in annotations.

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 clearly structured with bold labels (Purpose, Body, Idempotent, Returns) and each sentence provides distinct information. It is appropriately sized for the tool complexity and front-loads the 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?

The description covers the core usage, idempotency, propagation, and return shape, which is substantial given the output schema and annotations exist. However, it does not elaborate on the complex options structure or many optional parameters, leaving some gaps for a 14-parameter 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?

With only 7% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for key parameters: `name` is required, `description` is conditionally required based on `type`, and `type` values are mapped to CHAT_INPUT/USER/MESSAGE. However, 11 parameters remain undocumented, so the description only partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 or upsert a global application command' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from guild commands by specifying 'global' and mentions the ~1 hour propagation time, which separates it from sibling commands like commands_create_guild.

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 provides context about global command propagation delay but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool. The 'Idempotent' and propagation notes imply usage considerations, but there is no exclusion such as 'use commands_create_guild for instant propagation.'

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