Create Zendesk Ticket

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

Annotations provide basic safety flags (not read-only, not destructive). Description adds behavioral details: 'The description becomes the first public comment of the ticket, and the new ticket id is returned.' Also explains tag formatting (lowercase, underscore). No contradiction.

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 sentences: first states purpose, second explains key behavior (first comment, returned id), third provides alternative tool guidance. Front-loaded, no waste.

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 no output schema, the description explains that the new ticket id is returned, which is sufficient. It covers creation behavior, provides guidance on field IDs, and mentions related tools. Minor gap: no mention of error handling or rate limits, but overall adequate for an 8-param creation tool.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats some schema info (e.g., description becomes first comment) and adds the return of ticket id, but no unique parameter insights beyond what the schema already provides for each property.

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's purpose: 'Create a new Zendesk support ticket with subject, description, and optional priority/type/assignee/tags.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_ticket, add_public_comment, etc., by noting they are for post-creation actions.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (to create a new ticket) and when not to (after creation, use other tools). Also provides guidance on how to find valid IDs via search_users, list_ticket_fields, etc.

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