safe_mind_create_department

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so: idempotent on exact name match, areas are immutable (cannot be renamed or deleted), API-key requirement with two ways to satisfy it, and the account-scoped blast radius. It even discloses the return payload (id and name).

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?

Five short sentences, each doing distinct work: purpose, idempotency, sibling interaction, immutability, auth. The core purpose is front-loaded and nothing is redundant.

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 single-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the return value, auth, scope, idempotency, and immutability — everything an agent needs to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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% and the schema already documents the exact, case-sensitive matching and gives examples, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the idempotency consequence of that matching ('if an area with exactly this name exists, that one is returned and nothing is duplicated'), which is meaningful semantic value beyond the schema.

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 one department/area ... and return its id and name'), and names the domain term Tätigkeitsbereich. It also implicitly separates itself from safe_mind_create_survey and safe_mind_list_departments by explaining the creation-and-return contract.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when this call is NOT needed ('Not needed before safe_mind_create_survey, which creates missing areas by name itself'), names the prerequisite for auth, and states the idempotency rule that determines whether the call is safe to repeat. Both the when and the when-not are present.

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