create_account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no mention of permissions, duplicate detection, what happens on name collision, or what is returned on success. The verb 'Create' at least signals a mutation, but nothing beyond that.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of padding, which is good structure. But at this length for a 15-parameter creation tool it reads as under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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?

A 15-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 47% schema coverage needs a substantive description; a six-word sentence leaves the agent without the information required to call it correctly.

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 only 47% across 15 parameters, so the description is expected to compensate, and it adds zero parameter information. Roughly half the fields (city, tags, phone, state, address, country, website, annual_revenue) have no documented meaning anywhere.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new account') and the parenthetical '(company)' disambiguates it from the person-oriented create_contact / create_lead siblings. It does not, however, differentiate itself explicitly from update_account or explain its position in the account lifecycle.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. whether the account must be unique, whether an owner is required), and no pointer to alternatives. The agent must infer usage purely from the tool name.

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