app_availabilities_v2__create

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation), but the description adds no behavioral details. It does not mention side effects, required permissions, idempotency, or what happens if the availability already exists. The description merely restates 'Create', which is already implied by the name and annotations.

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 plus the HTTP method in brackets, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 complexity of the nested input schema and the lack of an output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain the purpose of app availabilities, the expected response, or how this tool fits into the workflow. The agent lacks context beyond the schema.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% (all parameters have descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The schema's description for the body parameter ('JSON:API request body (Apple schema: AppAvailabilityV2CreateRequest)') is sufficient but the tool description does not enhance it.

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 the resource ('app availabilities (v2)'), with the HTTP endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like `app_availabilities_v2__get` or `app_availabilities_v2__territory_availabilities__list`, which have different operations.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to create versus update or read availabilities. No context on prerequisites or conditions is given.

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