create_poll_answer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Creates an answer option' without revealing side effects (e.g., whether creation is permanent, if duplicates are allowed, or if special permissions are required). This leaves the agent uncertain about the operation's impact beyond the literal action.

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 a single, clear sentence with no waste. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. There is no unnecessary verbosity 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?

Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, including company_id and question_id) and lack of output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the relationship between answers and questions, the required context (e.g., which question this applies to), or what the response contains. The agent lacks enough information to use this tool confidently alongside the many sibling poll tools.

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?

The schema covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it correctly implies the tool's purpose without needing to restate parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb ('Creates') and a clear resource ('an answer option for a question'), which directly states the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_poll_question, which creates a question, and edit_poll_answer/delete_poll_answer, which modify or remove answers.

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. The description lacks any mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions (e.g., 'Use this when adding a new answer to an existing poll question'). It only states the action without context.

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