bricks_create_redirect

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

Description adds 'Hits are tracked automatically on the frontend,' which reveals a behavioral trait beyond the schema. However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., whether creating a redirect with duplicate source is allowed, or if changes are immediate). With no annotations, more detail would improve transparency.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences, zero wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, followed by behavioral note. Perfectly structured for quick comprehension.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and a behavioral detail. However, it does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., redirect ID, success message) or any error conditions. Slightly lacking completeness for a atomic operation.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents parameters fully. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states it creates redirects of types 301, 302, or 307. The verb 'create' and resource 'redirect' are specific. With sibling tools like bricks_delete_redirect, bricks_list_redirects, it effectively distinguishes its purpose.

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 explicit guidelines on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bricks_delete_redirect or bricks_list_redirects. While context from sibling names suggests purpose, the description lacks 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions.

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