create_label

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

The description reveals non-obvious behavior: it returns an existing label if one with the same title already exists, with created=false. This adds value beyond the annotations, which only state not readonly, not destructive, etc. No contradiction 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence carries essential information without redundancy. Highly efficient and well-structured.

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 no output schema, the description covers return behavior (existing label with created=false) and scope (global). It adequately explains the tool's function and expected outcome. Minor missing details are covered by the schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds some meaning to the 'title' parameter by mentioning it as the basis for existence check, but does not elaborate on color, category, or description. Adequate but not exceptional.

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 tool creates a label/tag definition in the workspace. It specifies that labels are global and can be attached to any issue, distinguishing it from add_issue_label. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly says when to use this tool (to create a label) and when not (use add_issue_label to attach to an issue). It provides a clear alternative and context, leaving no ambiguity for the agent.

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