create_userstory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states 'Create', offering no details about side effects, return values (e.g., does it return the created user story?), authorization requirements, or error handling. The verb implies mutation, but further disclosure is missing.

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 concise sentence with no redundancy. However, it could be slightly restructured to front-load key information, and adding a second sentence for behavioral details would not harm 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?

For a creation tool with 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to mention what happens upon creation (e.g., returns the user story ID), any constraints on 'points' or 'tags', or how to handle errors. The schema covers param details, but the overall context is incomplete.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for 86% of parameters (including nested 'points'), so the description adds no new semantic value. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description could have clarified complex parameters like 'points' or 'tags'.

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 explicitly states 'Create a new user story in a Taiga project', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_issue' or 'create_epic' by mentioning the entity type, and from 'bulk_create_userstories' by implying a single 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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'bulk_create_userstories' or 'update_userstory'. There are no prerequisites, edge cases, or when-not-to-use instructions, leaving the agent without usage context.

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