create_quotation

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 only mentions creation but does not discuss side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens to existing data. The description is insufficient for a mutation tool with no 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action. However, given the tool's complexity (32 parameters, nested objects), a slightly more expanded description would be beneficial. It earns a 4 for efficiency but not perfection.

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 high complexity (32 params, nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too minimal. It does not explain return behavior, constraints, defaults, or the structure of items. The description is inadequate for complete understanding.

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 59%, meaning many parameters lack descriptions. The tool description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. For a tool with moderate coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 action ('Buat' = create) and the resource ('manage quotation baru') along with its items ('beserta item-itemnya'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_quotation, delete_quotation, and other create_* tools by specifying the resource type and that items are included.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as update_quotation for modifications or delete_quotation for removal. It lacks context on prerequisites, required conditions, or 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.