create_armor

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states 'Create a new armor in the database', which implies an insert operation. It does not disclose side effects, return values, or authorization needs. For a mutation tool without annotations, this is insufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and efficient for an agent to parse.

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 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description falls short. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., the created armor object), nor does it cover behavioral constraints like validation rules beyond the schema. A create operation typically needs return value context.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the input schema already provides. Parameters like 'atypeId' and 'etypeId' have default explanations in the schema.

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 'Create a new armor in the database' clearly states the verb 'create' and the resource 'armor', making it distinct from sibling create tools like create_weapon or create_item. It directly answers 'what does this tool do?' with specificity.

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 usage guidelines or alternatives are provided. However, as a create tool, its usage is implied when the goal is to insert a new armor record. Lacks when-not clauses or comparisons to siblings like create_item.

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