topic.create

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that it creates a directory and a TOPIC.md file, but does not disclose what happens if the directory already exists, whether it overwrites content, or any permission requirements. This is a minimal, surface-level description that lacks side-effect and safety details.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core action and outputs without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, making it compact and easily parseable.

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 lack of annotations, an output schema that is not shown, and zero schema descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to reliably invoke the tool. It does not specify what 'dir' should look like (e.g., path vs. name), whether 'description' is the entire file content, or what the tool returns. A simple creation tool still needs more contextual guidance for correct usage.

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 schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage) and the parameters are wrapped in a single 'arg' object. The description hints that 'dir' is the directory name and 'description' is the content for TOPIC.md, but it does not explicitly map parameters, nor does it explain input formats, constraints, or relationships. The description only partially compensates for the lack of schema detail.

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 uses a specific verb ('create') and a concrete resource ('topic dir + TOPIC.md description'), clearly stating what the tool produces. It distinguishes from sibling tools like postit.create by focusing on topic-specific content, and the mention of TOPIC.md makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like topic.write or postit.create. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the topic directory must not already exist) or any context in which this tool is appropriate. The name implies creation, but the description itself offers no usage direction.

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