lc_preview_create_output

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. 'Preview creating' implies a non-destructive operation, but this is not explicitly stated. No information on side effects, permissions, or return behavior is given, leaving ambiguity.

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 only 4 words, which is overly terse. While front-loaded, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, missing critical guidance on usage and parameters.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is woefully incomplete. It fails to explain what the tool returns, how to interpret a preview, or any parameter semantics, making it nearly useless for an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning parameter titles are the only info. The description adds no explanation for any of the 6 parameters (oid, name, module, data_type, config, token_ttl_seconds), leaving their purpose and constraints completely undocumented.

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 phrase 'Preview creating an output integration' clearly identifies the verb (preview creating) and resource (output integration), distinguishing it from other preview tools for different resources. However, it does not clarify what 'preview' entails (e.g., validation, simulation) or how it relates to actual creation.

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 like lc_list_outputs or actual creation endpoints. The description lacks any mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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