create_epic

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

Annotations already indicate this is a destructive, non-idempotent, open-world write operation. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by detailing what gets created (epic directory, epic.md file, registration in requirements-index.md) and the return values, enhancing behavioral understanding without contradiction.

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 front-loaded with the core action and efficiently lists key steps and return values in two sentences. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 complexity of a destructive creation tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it explains the creation process and return values. However, it could mention potential errors or dependencies, slightly reducing completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters. The description doesn't add meaning beyond the schema, as it doesn't explain parameter usage or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 verb ('Create') and resource ('a new epic'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying unique actions like assigning EPIC-NNN ID, creating directory/files, and registering in requirements-index.md. It's specific and differentiates from tools like 'create_story' or 'groom_epic'.

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 description implies usage for creating epics but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like 'create_story' or 'groom_epic'. It provides context about the creation process but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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