create_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and does not disclose whether the tool overwrites existing files, creates parent directories, requires any permissions, or fails under certain conditions. For a mutation tool, this leaves important behavioral ambiguity.

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 filler. It is front-loaded with the action and object. It could perhaps add a brief behavioral note, but as a concise statement it is efficient and easy to parse.

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 tool is simple and the schema covers both parameters, but with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least clarify overwrite behavior, parent directory creation, or failure modes. These gaps matter for an agent choosing and invoking a file-creation tool safely.

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 100%: both path and content are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'with content', so it does not improve on the schema, but it also does not need to. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create'), a clear resource ('a new file'), and states the primary purpose ('with content'). It distinguishes clearly from sibling tools like open_file, run_terminal_command, and search_workspace, none of which are about creating files.

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 wording implies this tool should be used for creating new files, and the sibling names make the contrast obvious. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of open_file, nor does it mention what happens if the file already exists or whether it should be preferred over other write paths.

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