surveymonkey_create_question

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses input structure and allowed family/subtype combinations, which is helpful, but it does not mention authorization needs, error behavior, or side effects such as question ordering or whether the question is appended. For a mutating operation, more behavioral context would be valuable.

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 well-organized: a one-line summary, a clear Args section, a structured payload example with inline annotations, and a compact list of common family/subtype values. Every section earns its place and there is no filler.

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 nested payload and lack of schema descriptions, the definition is largely complete: it covers all required parameters, optional flags, answer structures, and valid family/subtype combinations. Minor gaps are the lack of explicit notes about page_id belonging to the survey_id and any permission prerequisites, but the provided context and sibling tools make the call executable without those details.

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 0%, but the description fully compensates. It explains survey_id and page_id, and provides a detailed payload schema with required/optional fields, nested structure, examples, and a list of valid family/subtype pairings. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare input schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Creates a new question on a survey page.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from the sibling get/update/delete question operations, and the summary line is unambiguous about what the tool does.

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 creation context is clear, and the payload documentation gives concrete guidance on how to use the tool correctly. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but because this is the only create-question tool and the operation is stated directly, the usage context is effectively communicated.

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