Create Container

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive nature. The description adds a useful hierarchy rule ('Area organizes Projects') and allowed task containers, which goes beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, relationship to other entities, or naming/uniqueness constraints.

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 additional context is brief. Minor deduction for not explicitly naming parameters, but structure is clean.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and overlapping sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, required parent relationships, and how to differentiate from create_project/create_collection. The agent would need to guess at key semantics.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions some enum values ('Inbox, Project, Collection, Reach Out, or Someday') and implies parent-child relationships, but it does not explain the `name`, `sort_order`, `description`, or `parent_container_id` parameters. This is insufficient for 5 parameters.

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 a Container/List') and provides useful context about container types. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this generic tool from sibling tools like create_project or create_collection, which might cause confusion about which tool to use.

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 explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives is provided. The second sentence explains type semantics but does not guide the agent on choosing this tool over the more specific create_project/create_collection tools. Missing exclusions or alternative references.

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