create_view

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that the tool creates a view and returns it, but fails to cover side effects, permissions, idempotency, or error conditions. The description is too terse for a creation tool with many options.

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 concise at four sentences, front-loading the purpose and key constraint. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 complexity (13 parameters, no output schema, many siblings), the description covers the core purpose and the one-parent constraint but lacks context on optional complex parameters, error handling, or view behavior. It is adequate but not rich.

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 has 100% description coverage, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by explicitly stating that exactly one parent id must be provided, clarifying the mutual exclusivity of team_id, space_id, folder_id, and list_id. It also notes that the created view is returned.

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 it creates a new View on a Team, Space, Folder, or List, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_view and other create tools by specifying the resource and 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 description explains when to use the tool (to save a reusable layout) and the constraint of providing exactly one parent id. However, it does not explicitly guide when not to use it or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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