whodb_platform_create_dataset

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

Annotations declare the tool is destructive and non-idempotent, but the description adds the critical non-obvious behavior: the default mode returns a confirmation token and a preview must be user-approved before calling whodb_platform_confirm. It also discloses that workspace targeting is per-call only and does not change defaults, which annotations cannot convey.

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?

Four tightly-written sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the sibling routing, then the confirm-token safety note, then the workspace semantics. No filler and every sentence carries actionable information.

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 destructive creation tool with 7 params, no output schema and nested workspace, the description covers purpose, alternative routing, the confirm-preview safety workflow, and per-call workspace scoping. Everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly is present.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema documents name, columns, source_id, workspace, schema_mode, etc. The description adds a useful cross-parameter interaction that the schema does not: workspace is 'for per-call targeting without changing defaults', clarifying scope semantics beyond the per-field descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Create a hosted dataset through the selected project', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like whodb_platform_datasets (list) or whodb_platform_dataset (fetch). It also explicitly positions the tool against the raw whodb_platform_create sibling.

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 says when to use this over the generic whodb_platform_create ('Use this typed wrapper for normal dataset creation instead of raw whodb_platform_create when possible'), and gives an explicit workflow exclusion: don't call whodb_platform_confirm until the user approves the preview. This is exactly the routing guidance an agent needs.

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