pmg_transport_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it is a mutation with low destructiveness and a dry-run mode, but it does not explain side effects like rule activation or error handling. There is no contradiction with 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 concise, front-loading the main action and dry-run info, then listing parameter details. It is well-structured and avoids unnecessary verbosity.

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 tool has 8 parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers most parameters but omits the 'comment' parameter and does not explain what happens after creation (e.g., immediate effect, idempotency, error handling). It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 schema description coverage is low (13%), so the description adds significant value by explaining domain, host, port, protocol, and use_mx. It provides meaning beyond the schema, including default values and allowed values for protocol.

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 tool creates a mail transport rule. The verb 'create' and resource 'mail transport rule' are specific. While it differentiates from sibling tools like pmg_transport_delete, it does not explicitly contrast with potential listing or update tools, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 mentions dry-run by default and the need for PROXIMO_PMG_* config, providing basic usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus other transport-related tools or give explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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