create_blist

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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond what annotations already declare. Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description does not explain the actual effects, side effects, or any other behavioral traits. It merely repeats the endpoint and notes Python SDK parity, which is not behavior.

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 line with no fluff, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential information that a tool description should include, so the brevity is not a positive. It is not structured in any way, but it is short and to the point.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and potentially destructive behavior, this description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what the tool does, when to use it, what the parameters mean, or what the return value looks like. The description is wholly inadequate for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 input schema has 7 parameters with only dry_run having a description (in Russian). The tool description provides no additional meaning for any parameter names or how they relate to the blist creation process. With schema coverage at 14%, the description does nothing to compensate, leaving most parameters unexplained.

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 provides the HTTP endpoint 'POST /api/v2/blist/create', which implies the tool creates a blist, but it never explicitly states that. The phrase 'WhiteLabel (Python SDK parity)' adds context but not clarity. It is more of a technical reference than a clear statement of purpose, though it does distinguish from siblings like get_blist and update_blist by the 'create' action.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is for creating a new blist, nor does it point to update_blist for modifications or get_blist for retrieval. The agent is left without any usage context.

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