create_status

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, yet it only states the basic action. It omits critical details like permissions required, side effects (e.g., does it create a new status column?), or limits.

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 extremely short (one sentence), which is efficient but sacrifices necessary detail for a creation tool. While it's front-loaded, it lacks structure expected for a tool with multiple parameters.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., the created status object). It does not, leaving the agent without crucial context on how to use the result.

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 has 7 parameters with 57% description coverage, but the tool description adds no information about any parameter. The description does not clarify what parameters like 'Space', 'color', or 'order' mean for the status creation context.

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 specifies the action ('Create') and the resource ('a status on a board'), making the tool's function understandable. However, it does not distinguish this from other 'create' sibling tools like create_board or create_task, which could cause confusion.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_status or clone_board. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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