Create Python DAT

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

Discloses key behavioral nuances beyond annotations: Script DAT's read-only text and the auto-created companion callbacks DAT, that it only stores code, and that it returns the created DAT's path. This is significant context not captured by the structured fields.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and each sentence provides necessary details without redundancy. It efficiently covers creation, options, a caveat, and a pointer to the alternative tool.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (path), the behavior across all dat_type variants, and the relationship to execute_python_script. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

While schema covers 100% of parameters, the description adds meaning by explaining dat_type with concrete examples (Text, Execute, Script) and the special behavior for Script DAT. It also clarifies that name is auto-generated when omitted, and that code goes into the DAT.

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 specifies the action (create), the resource (DAT node), and the scope (under parent_path preloaded with code). It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming execute_python_script as the alternative for immediate execution, and explains the different DAT types.

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 states when to use this tool (storing code as a node) and when not to (use execute_python_script to run Python immediately). Also clarifies the use case for each dat_type (Text, Execute, Script) with examples like onFrameStart and table builder.

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