Create Content Tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it discloses the return payload ('returns the created tag with its id') and implies a non-idempotent duplicate risk by recommending a lookup first. Permission requirements and the consequence of duplicates are not stated, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three tightly written sentences: purpose first, then what it returns and the duplicate-avoidance workflow, then the contrasting alternative. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description states the return value ('the created tag with its id'), covers the create-then-attach lifecycle, and routes to the correct alternative for a closely related concept. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 100% with a clear description and example values ('billing', 'getting-started'). The description's 'end-user visible labels' phrasing reinforces the schema rather than adding new syntax or constraint detail, so the baseline 3 for fully documented schema applies.

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 new content tag for Guide articles') and immediately defines what a content tag is and how it differs from article labels, a sibling concept (list_labels). An agent can distinguish it from manage_tags and list_content_tags without opening any schema.

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 pre-flight step ('check list_content_tags first, filter by name_prefix, to avoid duplicates'), the follow-up attachment path ('content_tag_ids of create_article or update_article'), and a named alternative for the when-not case (internal search-ranking labels → list_labels).

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