Create a new list in an Arca workspace by providing the workspace ID and list name, with optional color, icon, or folder placement.
Create a new list in a workspace
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| icon | No | Icon name | |
| name | Yes | List name | |
| color | No | Color value | |
| folder_id | No | Optional folder ID | |
| workspace_id | Yes | The workspace ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only that a list is created, but does not mention side effects, permissions required, whether the workspace must exist, or what response is returned. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.
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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, containing zero waste. It communicates the core function efficiently.
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?
The tool is simple and the schema fully covers parameters, but the lack of annotations and absence of return-value or behavioral details leave gaps. An agent can invoke the tool correctly based on schema, but not fully anticipate outcomes or preconditions.
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 100%, so the schema fully documents all five parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the heavy lifting.
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 verb 'create' and the resource 'list' in a workspace, making the tool's function unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like create_task and create_folder by naming the specific resource type, but does not explicitly differentiate from update_list or delete_list.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_list or create_folder. No context is provided about prerequisites, when not to use the tool, or relationships to other list-related operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.