fossa_create_organization_label

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false), the description discloses the write requirement (FOSSA_ALLOW_WRITES=true), the unattached creation behavior, premium plan restriction, and that the response contains the new numeric id. No contradictions with annotations.

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 sentences, each with distinct value: purpose, write requirement, workflow context, and plan restriction/response. Front-loaded with the main action; no fluff or repetition.

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 create operation with one parameter, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, how it fits with related tools, prerequisites (write flag), limitations (premium plans), and response content. The output schema existence further reduces the need to explain return structure.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides context that the label is an 'organization label for tagging projects,' but it does not specify allowed formats, uniqueness, or other constraints for the 'label' string parameter. Minimal added meaning 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 opens with 'Create a new organization label for tagging projects,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fossa_apply_project_label and fossa_create_package_labels by specifying 'organization label' and noting that it creates an unattached label.

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?

Explicitly states the label is created unattached and that fossa_apply_project_label puts it on projects, providing a clear workflow. It also mentions the premium plan restriction (403) and the FOSSA_ALLOW_WRITES=true requirement, giving conditions for use.

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