create_card

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) already indicate it's a write operation. The description adds that content supports markdown and returns the created card id, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like side effects or permissions beyond the annotation defaults.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. The key information is front-loaded: purpose, prerequisite, content feature, and return value.

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?

With 5 parameters (3 required) and no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite (type), content format, and return value. It omits the optional 'parent' parameter but overall is adequate for a creation tool with good schema coverage.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. The description adds meaning by stating 'Requires a master tag (card type)' for the 'type' parameter and 'Content supports markdown formatting' for 'content', providing context beyond the schema's minimal descriptions.

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 'Create a new card in a Huly card space', which specifies the verb (create) and resource (card). It also adds detail about requiring a master tag and markdown support, distinguishing it from update/delete cards and other creation tools.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires a master tag (card type)') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_issue or other create tools. No guidance on exclusions or preferred scenarios.

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