Create an unmanaged solution

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that without confirm it performs a dry run, that it may create a publisher, and that it operates in a live environment. This is meaningful behavioral context for a creation tool.

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?

Three short sentences with no redundancy. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by the usage context and the confirm requirement. Every sentence earns its place.

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 creation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and the key behavioral requirement (confirm). It doesn't mention conflict handling or error cases, but these are less critical and could be derived from schema defaults and sibling tools.

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 71%, above the 50% threshold, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a bit of meaning by clarifying that confirm is required and that uniqueName serves as the solution container name referenced by cs_create_agent, but it does not elaborate on the other parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the action: create an unmanaged solution (and publisher if missing) via a specific mechanism (packing empty manifest, importing with pac). It also mentions the relationship to cs_create_agent, which helps distinguish it from creation-related siblings.

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?

States an explicit use case: prepare container before cs_create_agent. Mentions the confirm: true requirement, which is a necessary precondition. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives, but the target scenario is well-defined.

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