create_goal

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry the burden. It discloses that it creates a goal (a write operation) and returns the created goal with id. It does not mention side effects, errors, prerequisites, or rate limits, but for a simple create tool, this is adequate.

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?

Three sentences: main action, return value, next step. No wasted words, front-loaded with the key purpose. Highly concise and well-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?

For a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers creation, return value, and follow-up step. It doesn't explain workspace fallback or multiple_owners details, but schema covers those. Lacks only minor context about prerequisites.

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 coverage is 100%, so schema descriptions already cover parameters. The description mentions optional due date, description, owners, and color but adds no new meaning beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states 'Create a new Goal in a Workspace' with specific verb and resource. It lists optional parameters and distinguishes from siblings like update_goal and create_key_result by mentioning the return value and suggesting next steps.

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?

Description gives clear context for when to use (creating a goal) and explicitly suggests using create_key_result for adding targets later. However, it lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives for when not to use this tool.

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