cor_create_ratecard

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, authorization requirements, idempotency, or success/failure behavior. With no annotations present, the burden falls entirely on the description, which it fails to meet.

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 very short, which is efficient, but the 'Args' section is redundant with the input schema and adds no new structure. It earns a middle score for being concise but underdeveloped.

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 an unstructured object parameter and the existence of an output schema, the description should explain the expected format of 'data' or the return value. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 only parameter 'data' is an unstructured object with no schema-defined properties. The description adds minimal value by listing example fields ('name, description, rates, etc.'), but it does not specify required structure or constraints, leaving the agent with significant ambiguity.

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 action and resource: 'Create a new ratecard.' This verb-resource pair is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like cor_create_client or cor_create_contract.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any context about prerequisites, when not to use it, or which sibling tools might be relevant.

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