Create Custom Property

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that a propertyId is returned for chaining, but says nothing about duplicate-name behavior (relevant given idempotentHint=false) or permission requirements for workspace-wide changes.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the return contract. No filler and nothing redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, though naming propertyId is a nice touch. However, for a mutating create tool in a large sibling set, the description omits prerequisite context (how it relates to set_doc_property/list_doc_properties/delete_custom_property) and the meaning of the unlabeled workspaceId parameter.

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 coverage is 75%, and the description restates the type enumeration already declared in the schema enum. The undocumented parameter, workspaceId, is not clarified in the description either — it's unclear whether workspaceId is optional or how the workspace-wide scope is resolved when it's omitted.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Create a workspace-wide custom property definition") and scopes it with the allowed value types and the returned propertyId. The workspace-wide scope implicitly distinguishes it from doc-level operations like set_doc_property, but the sibling create/delete/list property tools are never named.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisite (e.g., that a definition must exist before set_doc_property can be used), and no mention of when NOT to use it. The only guidance is implied by "workspace-wide" and the existence of delete_custom_property.

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