create_stage

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

The description states the tool creates a stage and returns a dict, but lacks disclosure of side effects (e.g., persistence), permissions needed, behavior on duplicates, or connection requirements. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 concise, structured in a readable Args/Returns format, and includes only necessary information. It could be slightly more efficient by removing the 'Returns' boilerplate.

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?

The description lacks important context about output schema details (though not required if output schema exists), behavioral guarantees, and error conditions. For a creation tool with no annotations, this is incomplete.

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 lists all three parameters with brief explanations and a URL example, which adds basic meaning beyond the schema. However, details like valid URL formats or constraints are missing.

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 action is 'Create' and the resource is 'Databend stage', which is distinct from siblings like show_stages. However, it lacks context on what a stage represents, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 show_stages or execute_sql. There is no explicit statement of prerequisites or scenarios.

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