cor_create_contract

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions required, validation constraints, or what happens upon creation (e.g., confirmation, ID generation). The simple statement 'Create a new contract' indicates it is a mutative operation, but nothing more.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core action. It avoids redundancy but omits important details that could be included without increasing length significantly. The structure is clean.

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?

Given the complexity of creating a contract with a loosely-typed 'data' object, the description lacks essential details like required fields, default values, field formats, and possible outcomes. Although an output schema exists (not shown), the description is incomplete for an AI agent to reliably invoke the 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?

The input schema has a single 'data' parameter as an object with additionalProperties true, providing no field-level details. The description compensates by listing example fields (name, clientId, startDate, endDate, value, status, etc.), adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify required subfields or constraints.

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 'Create a new contract.' along with a list of example fields (name, clientId, etc.), specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling create tools by being specific to contracts, though it lacks additional context for precise identification.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for creating contracts, but there are no when-not-to-use statements or mentions of alternative tools like cor_create_contract_position or cor_list_contracts.

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