tool_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the tool wraps an HTTP API endpoint with optional credential injection, health monitoring, and schema validation, but does not disclose whether creation requires special permissions, what happens if a tool with the same name already exists, or if the operation is idempotent.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose and optional features. It is front-loaded and avoids unnecessary elaboration.

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?

With 17 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not cover return values, error conditions, or prerequisites (e.g., required permissions or credential setup). The high parameter count demands more contextual guidance.

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 all 17 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no new information about parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 it registers a new tool in the tool registry and explains that a tool wraps an HTTP API endpoint with optional credential injection, health monitoring, and schema validation. This distinguishes it from siblings like tool_update and tool_list, though the verb 'register' could be more specific than 'create'.

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 when to use this tool (to register a new tool), but provides no guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. Given the presence of similar sibling tools like tool_update and berrry_create_tool, explicit differentiation would improve this score.

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