Create Custom Schema

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

Annotations provide basic behavioral hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the description does not need to repeat those. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as side effects, authentication needs, or error behavior. The transparency is adequate but not enhanced.

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 very concise: two sentences plus a compact list of arguments. It is front-loaded with the purpose and structure, and every word contributes 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?

The description is adequate for a simple creation tool with no output schema. However, it lacks details on return value, error handling, and constraints (e.g., unique name). Given the presence of sibling CRUD tools and modest annotations, additional context would improve agent decision-making.

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 merely restates parameter names and types already present in the schema without adding deeper meaning (e.g., validation rules, format, examples). It provides no extra semantic value.

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 new custom schema to extend Machship entities with additional fields. The verb 'creates' and resource 'custom schema' are specific, and the purpose distinguishes it from sibling CRUD operations like get, update, and delete.

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?

Usage is implied but not explicit. The description states it creates a new schema, but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions. No alternatives are named.

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