provision_sandbox

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (provisioning simulated data) but does not mention side effects, idempotency, authorization requirements, or whether the operation is reversible. This is insufficient 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?

The description is a single sentence of seven words, conveying the essential action without any superfluous content. It is highly concise and front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to quickly grasp the tool's purpose.

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 parameters, output schema, and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits important details such as return value, typical response time, or any preconditions. For a tool that creates an environment, more context is expected for complete understanding.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, the baseline score for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no further parameter information since none exist. It is adequate for a parameterless tool.

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 uses the specific verb 'Provision' and identifies the resource as 'developer sandbox environment with simulated data', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'sandbox_status' which check status rather than create. However, it could be more specific about the contents of the simulated data.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is no mention that this tool should be used to create a new sandbox, while 'sandbox_status' is for checking existing ones. The description lacks explicit context for appropriate usage.

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