create_ticket

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

Annotations already indicate a mutation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds only the system name 'Planhat'. No additional behavioral details like success/error responses, permissions, or idempotency implications.

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?

Extremely concise at 7 words, but this comes at the cost of informativeness. For a tool with multiple parameters and no schema descriptions, more detail is warranted.

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 5 parameters (including a nested object), 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is far from complete. It fails to explain inputs, required fields, or return behavior.

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 descriptions cover 0% of parameters. The description provides no help on any of the 5 parameters (subject, owner_id, company_id, description, extra_fields), nor does it clarify that company_id is required.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Create' and resource 'ticket' in Planhat, distinguishing it from other create_ tools among siblings like create_asset or create_company. However, it lacks any further differentiation, e.g., from create_issue or create_conversation.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as create_issue or create_task. The description provides no context about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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