create_collection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses two side effects: a collection plus a source.yaml are written, and no job is started (the key behavioral distinction). It says nothing about permissions/authentication, whether an existing collection is overwritten, or what identifiers are returned.

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, no filler, and the core action plus its 'no job started' constraint are front-loaded. The second sentence is slightly clunky ('After this, call start_collection only when...') but earns its place by establishing the workflow order.

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?

For a 5-parameter creation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema descriptions, the definition is under-specified. It never explains the enum strategy, optional limits like max_items, or what the call returns, so an agent cannot confidently populate or act on the result.

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 offers no parameter meaning at all. Five parameters exist (url, name, the strategy enum, max_items, instructions) and the agent gets no hint about what url points to, what the strategy values mean, or how instructions shape collection behavior.

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 and resource: create a WebContent collection (plus a source.yaml) without starting a job. It explicitly contrasts with the sibling start_collection, so the agent can separate creation from execution. 'Safe WebContent collection' is slightly opaque jargon, but the action is unambiguous.

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?

Gives an explicit sequencing rule with a condition: create first, then call start_collection only when the user asks to begin. That is real when-to-use guidance for the follow-up step. It does not address alternatives other than start_collection (e.g. discover_site or list_collections) or any explicit when-not-to-use case.

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