kpaste_create

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) with side effects (openWorldHint=true). The description adds significant behavioral context: encryption, ephemerality, and the decryption key being URL fragment (client-side). No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded with core purpose: creation, encryption, and return format. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 description covers the tool's purpose, security model, and usage constraint. While it doesn't detail each parameter or the output schema, the schema already covers those. Missing explicit mention of burn_after_reading behavior, but 'ephemeral' implies it. Adequately complete for a tool with rich schema and annotations.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 4 parameters (content, password, expiration, burn_after_reading). The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond schema, so 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?

The description clearly states the tool creates an encrypted, ephemeral paste on kPaste, specifying security details (zero-knowledge, AES-256-GCM) and the return of a URL with decryption key. This distinguishes it from kpaste_read which would read pastes.

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 includes a usage constraint ('only use with a trusted transcript and MCP client') and implies sharing secrets. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings like kpaste_read or state 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.