Create Website

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) indicate mutation and side effects. The description adds important behavioral traits: it starts an async workflow and returns a workflow_id. This is beyond what annotations provide, making behavior clear.

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 two sentences: first states purpose, second details async workflow and optional client assignment. No redundant words, front-loaded with the main action.

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 no output schema, the description fully explains the return (workflow_id) and how to get the final result (poll check_website_status). The optional client assignment is covered. No missing critical information for an async creation tool.

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?

All parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage). The description clarifies the relationship between client_id, client_email, and client_name, adding meaning beyond the schema, e.g., that client_name is used when creating a new client with client_email.

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 'Create' and resource 'website', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like create_blog or batch_create_websites. The purpose is immediately clear.

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 explains the asynchronous workflow and directs the agent to poll check_website_status for progress, providing usage context. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives like batch_create_websites, but the guidance is sufficient.

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