create_file

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior on its own. It discloses the primary side effect (file creation) and a key edge case (fails if exists), but omits other behavioral traits such as whether parent directories are created, permission requirements, or error handling on partial writes.

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 concise sentences with no filler or repetition. The action verb is front-loaded, and every word contributes meaning.

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 simple two-parameter file creation tool with an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a key failure mode. It is slightly incomplete regarding directory creation or permissions, but these are not critical for basic file creation and the output schema likely covers return values.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only indirectly references 'content' and does not explain 'path' format or any constraints. Though parameter names are self-explanatory, the description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Creates' and names the resource ('a new file') with content. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'overwrite_file' by stating it fails if the file already exists, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 failure condition ('Fails if the file already exists') provides implicit guidance to use this tool only for new files and to consider the sibling tool for overwriting. However, it does not explicitly name 'overwrite_file' as an alternative, so it lacks a fully explicit when-not-to-use statement.

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