Create step series (sequential) (admin)

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and the description reinforces this with 'MUTATES live game config'. It adds the advice to prefer staging, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence defines the tool's purpose, and the second provides usage context and a mutation warning. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 the complexity (nested objects, 9 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose and mutation warning adequately. However, it lacks details on return values or error conditions, which an agent might need. Still, it is sufficient for a create tool with a detailed input 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 description coverage is low (33%). The description adds meaning for the 'tasks' parameter by explaining that array order or sortingOrder defines the sequence. However, it does not elaborate on other parameters like name, projectId, levelLocks, or groupRewards, leaving gaps for the 9 parameters. The additional clarity on tasks raises the score above baseline but not enough to compensate fully.

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 'STEP SERIES' (typeId 2) with ordered tasks that unlock sequentially, given concrete examples like 'quest lines' and 'tutorial chains'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like specter_create_time_series (which likely handles parallel tasks).

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 states when to use the tool ('quest lines', 'tutorial chains', 'finish step 1 before step 2') and includes a warning about mutation ('MUTATES live game config — confirm and prefer staging'). It lacks explicit exclusions for alternatives but provides clear context.

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