create_element_with_view

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the combined creation of element and view, return IDs, and extension requirement. However, it does not discuss error conditions, idempotency, or permissions, which are relevant for a write operation.

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 concise with two sentences and a list of type examples. It front-loads the main purpose. The list is a bit long but acceptable.

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 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It partially explains return values (view._id and model._id) but does not describe the full response structure or error handling. Missing details on idempotency and required extension availability.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description provides type examples beyond the schema but does not add substantial information for other parameters. The coordinate defaults are mentioned in 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 model element and its visual view in one call, with specific use case and examples of diagram types. It is specific verb+resource, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling create_element, which likely creates only the model element.

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 says 'Use for populating native typed diagrams' and gives type examples, implying when to use. However, it does not state when not to use (e.g., if you need only the model element) or provide explicit alternatives.

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