Create a JobBOSS2 record

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

The description adds the useful behavioral detail that request data is validated against ECI's OpenAPI schema, which is beyond the annotations. It does not describe side effects, idempotency, or failure modes, but the annotations already signal readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false without contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence gives actionable workflow guidance that earns its place.

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?

The description provides a clear entry point for a complex creation tool by routing the agent to jobboss2_describe_resource for per-resource details. With an output schema present and annotations covering safety traits, the remaining gap is not explaining the distinction from create_report or the exact role of parentKeys.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate by explaining data, resource, and parentKeys. It only mentions 'required parent keys and fields' and defers to another tool for details; it does not explain the data parameter or how resource selects the record type. The resource enum helps, but the core data object remains underspecified.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('a JobBOSS2 record'), and the mention of ECI's OpenAPI schema adds specificity. It is distinguishable from the get/list/update/describe siblings, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from jobboss2_create_report beyond the word 'record'.

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 an explicit prerequisite: use jobboss2_describe_resource first to inspect required parent keys and fields. This tells the agent how to prepare a valid call, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as update or create_report.

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