map_trigger_create

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

Annotations provide basic traits (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false); the description adds valuable context: the trigger is disabled, ephemeral, and only supports bridge events, going beyond schema.

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?

One sentence is concise but omits key details like the meaning of 'ephemeral' or 'draft'; front-loaded but could be more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

With many sibling tools and an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks parameter details and usage guidance; could be more comprehensive for a creation tool.

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%, and the description does not explain any parameters; the single 'request' parameter's structure is left entirely to the 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 clearly states the tool creates a disabled, ephemeral box-trigger draft with bridge-event actions, distinguishing it from other map_trigger tools like update or list.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternative tools like map_trigger_update; usage is implied for creating new triggers but lacks context for decision-making.

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