create

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention that the operation copies atoms and leaves the original intact, nor does it disclose potential side effects. The schema's selection parameter description notes 'The original is left in place', but this is not carried into the main description.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is not verbose, but given the tool's need for contextual behavior, the brevity borders on under-specification. Still, the sentence is well-structured and clear.

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?

Despite having a schema with full parameter descriptions and an output schema, the description fails to provide essential context that distinguishes this tool from similar ones like 'extract' (which removes from the original) or 'select'. The presence of numerous sibling tools and no annotations makes this a significant gap.

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 input schema provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (name, selection, source_state), achieving 100% coverage. The description itself adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'creates' and specifies the resource 'a new object from a selection', clearly indicating the action. This distinguishes it from tools like 'extract' or 'delete' which also manipulate objects but with different semantics.

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 'extract' (which removes atoms from the original) or 'select'. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent without decision criteria.

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