create_directory

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond the annotations, specifically the recursive creation ('mkdir -p') and the silent success behavior if the directory already exists. These align with the idempotentHint annotation but provide concrete implementation context.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 directory creation tool with idempotentHint and a known output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. It notes recursion and silent success, which are the main nuances. No additional return value explanation is needed given the output schema exists.

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?

The description merely repeats 'Parameter: path (required)', which restates the schema without adding any new meaning. It does not explain what kind of path is expected (absolute/relative) or any constraints. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description fails to compensate.

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's function: 'Create a directory recursively (mkdir -p)'. This uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like write_file or delete_file.

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 provides clear context by noting it creates directories recursively and silently succeeds if the directory already exists. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is distinct and unambiguous given the sibling tool names.

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