create_worker_from_template

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

With no annotations, the description adds 'Generated scripts use stdlib only' and lists config fields, but does not disclose default worker state, email side effects, or permissions. It provides some behavioral context but not full transparency.

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 two sentences, concisely listing template types and configs without extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the purpose and efficiently organized.

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 6 template types and nested config, the description provides enough context to construct a valid invocation. It omits return value and post-creation behavior, but the critical template-config mapping is covered.

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 description maps each template_type to its required config fields (e.g., folder_backup: source, dest, keep, summary_email), which is essential since the schema only provides a vague 'Template-specific config fields' description for config.

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 'Create a worker using a built-in template' and enumerates specific template types, making the tool's purpose explicit and distinguishing it from the generic create_worker sibling.

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 implies usage for template-based workers by listing available template types, but does not explicitly contrast with create_worker or state when not to use it. Clear context is present without explicit exclusions.

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