Create Client

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). It does not disclose potential side effects, validation, uniqueness constraints, or permission requirements, so transparency is limited.

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 sentence, 'Create a new client/customer,' which is extremely concise and front-loaded. It contains no filler and every word contributes to the purpose.

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?

The description, combined with the comprehensive input schema and output schema, is adequate for a basic create operation. However, it lacks usage timing and behavioral caveats, which are not covered elsewhere, leaving some gaps in the complete picture.

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 describes all 10 parameters with full coverage, so the description's lack of parameter details is acceptable. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the semantic load.

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 identifies the action (create) and the resource (client/customer), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_clients and create_invoice. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, so it misses the highest rating.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states the action, leaving usage decisions entirely to the agent.

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