create_gateway

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

The tool is annotated as not read-only and not destructive, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not mention side effects, persistence, or the need to apply routing changes, leaving the agent without information on what happens after creation.

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 a single sentence with no extraneous words, front-loading the core action. It is efficiently structured.

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?

While the schema and output schema cover parameters and return values, the description is very thin. For a tool with nine parameters and routing implications, it would benefit from context about the gateway's role and any follow-up actions, but the existing schema mitigates some gaps.

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 100% description coverage across all nine parameters, so the schema fully documents parameter semantics. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 "Create a routing gateway" uses a specific action verb and clearly identifies the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the resource type and the create action, differentiating from update_gateway, delete_gateway, and create_gateway_group.

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?

The description provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus other gateway-related tools such as update_gateway or search_gateways. It only states the function without any context for selection.

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