ruddur_create_heading_template

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

While annotations already indicate this is not read-only, the description adds the permission requirement, which is useful. It does not disclose whether the original heading is modified or what happens to the template, but the annotations cover the safety profile adequately.

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 concise—two sentences that get straight to the point. 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?

Given the generic body schema (object/array/string) and lack of output schema, the description is minimal but not wholly inadequate. It does not explain what constitutes a valid template body, relying on the open-world hint for flexibility. Combined with the schema, it is acceptable but could be more helpful.

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 coverage is 100% (pathParams, body, and query all have descriptions). The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, but the phrase 'from a Heading' implies the id refers to a heading, matching the schema's path parameter.

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 the action ('Create') and the resource ('a reusable template from a Heading'). This directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ruddur_apply_heading_template and ruddur_list_heading_templates.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use this tool (to create a reusable template from a heading) and includes a permission prerequisite ('Requires scope: content.manage'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, which would make it a 5.

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