bw_create_adso

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the created aDSO is inactive and requires further steps. It also explains the default behavior for each action. However, it does not mention any authorization or rate limit constraints, but that's acceptable for this 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 core purpose, and structured logically. Every sentence serves a purpose—defining the tool, explaining actions, and giving workflow context—without any redundant 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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, two actions, no output schema), the description is quite complete. It covers the main use cases and provides necessary workflow context. Could be slightly improved by noting error handling for missing template, but still strong.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the relationship between 'action' and 'template_name' parameters, and the defaults. It clarifies the purpose of each action, which helps the agent understand parameter dependencies.

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 'Create a new aDSO shell' and distinguishes between 'from_template' and 'empty' actions. It also differentiates from sibling tools like bw_update_adso and bw_activate by explaining the post-creation workflow.

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 explicit guidance: use 'from_template' when a template exists, otherwise 'empty' creates a minimal shell. It also advises to add fields with bw_update_adso then activate with bw_activate, making it clear when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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