create_screen

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

No annotations provided, and the description lacks any behavioral details beyond the action. It does not disclose potential side effects, required permissions, idempotency, or success/failure responses, which are critical for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentence with no redundant information. However, it could include a bit more context without becoming verbose, such as linking to prerequisites.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should at least hint at the response (e.g., returns the created screen object). It also omits necessary context like the requirement that the projectId must refer to an existing project.

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 already covers all three parameters with clear descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, meriting a baseline score of 3.

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 action ('Create') and resource ('new screen') with the context 'under a specific project', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_project or create_test_case.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_project, create_test_case). The description does not specify prerequisites like the project must exist or when not to use it.

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