sqs_create_queue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action but omits important details for a mutating tool, such as whether it is idempotent, what happens if the queue already exists, and whether it returns a queue URL. This is a significant gap for a create operation.

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, focused sentence: 'Create a new SQS queue in LocalStack'. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, contains no fluff, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 low complexity (3 parameters, no output schema) and full schema coverage, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It conveys the operation and environment, and the schema fills in parameter specifics. No annotation support, but the tool is simple enough that this concise description works.

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 provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (name, fifo, visibilityTimeout). The description adds no parameter information, but per the baseline for high schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate: the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 new SQS queue in LocalStack' uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('SQS queue'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like sqs_delete_queue or sqs_list_queues. It also adds the 'LocalStack' environment context, reinforcing purpose.

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 phrase 'Create a new SQS queue in LocalStack' provides clear context for when the tool should be used (creating a queue in the LocalStack environment). No explicit exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, but the purpose is straightforward and the context is unambiguous.

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