Create CASDA manifest

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it states bounded metadata/checksum reads, no staging/download, omission of signed URLs, and recording an omission warning. This covers safety and side-effect details.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a bullet list. It front-loads the purpose and adds essential behavioral notes 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 presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description covers the tool's purpose, limitations, and behavioral details comprehensively. No gaps for an agent to understand when to invoke it.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add per-parameter details beyond what the schema provides, but the overall context of 'bounded metadata reads' and URL omission helps interpretation. No extra value beyond 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 clearly states the verb 'create' and resource 'manifest' with qualifiers 'versioned, machine-readable for explicit products'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like staging, downloading, and searching by focusing solely on manifest creation.

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 explicitly states what the tool does NOT do (not staging, download, writing to filesystem) and clarifies behavior when URL inclusion is requested. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like casda_get_product or casda_stage_products, leaving some ambiguity.

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