onboarding_post_resource

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

Annotations already disclose the safety profile: non-readOnly, openWorld, non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds useful scope by saying the resource is created in the current organization, but it does not explain duplication behavior, permissions, required inputs, or side effects beyond what annotations already state.

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 definition is short, but it repeats the same purpose across the first two lines and adds a raw endpoint path that duplicates annotation context. The useful scope is present but not efficiently 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?

The tool is a mutation with a nested request body and no output schema. The schema and annotations cover most structured needs, and the description adds organization scope, but it omits sibling differentiation and creation-specific behavioral detail that would help an agent invoke it confidently.

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 body schema documents the required planLink and resourceLink fields and optional properties. The description adds no parameter-level semantics or usage notes beyond the schema.

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 states a clear verb and resource: creating an onboarding resource in the current organization. It is identifiable, but it does not distinguish this tool from sibling onboarding POST tools such as onboarding_post_plan or onboarding_post_deployment.

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?

Usage is only implied by the word 'Create'. There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of sibling onboarding tools, nor are prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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