smb_create_automation

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 indicates a write operation ('Create') and mentions supported automation types, but lacks details on permissions, side effects, error handling, or what happens on duplicate names. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 consists of two short, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second elaborates on capabilities. Every word adds value, with no redundant or irrelevant information.

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 lack of an output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., ID of created automation). There is no mention of error states or success confirmation. For a creation tool, this is a notable gap, though sibling tools like smb_list_automations hint at what might be returned.

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 100%, so the schema already describes all parameters. The description adds context about supported automation types, which aligns with the triggerType and actions parameters, but does not add new syntactic or semantic details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create a new automation' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It also details what types of automations are supported (scheduled tasks, email sequences, triggered workflows), distinguishing it from sibling tools like smb_list_automations and smb_run_automation.

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 usage for creating automations, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., smb_run_automation for execution, or smb_list_automations for listing). No when-not or prerequisite conditions are mentioned.

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