create_suite

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

The annotations already cover mutability flags, so the description does not need to restate those. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: suites are leaf nodes, cannot be created at the root, and this tool is an alias rather than an independent operation. The requirement on parentId is disclosed clearly.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core action and object type come first, followed by alias relationship, usage condition, and constraint. Every sentence contributes necessary guidance without filler.

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 simple creation tool with three fully documented required parameters, the description is complete. It covers the target node type, its placement requirement, and the canonical when-to-use signal. Since no output schema exists, no return-value documentation is expected or required.

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 input schema covers all three parameters with full descriptions, so the baseline applies. The description adds a little value by explaining why parentId is required, but it does not meaningfully extend param semantics 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?

The description clearly states that create_suite creates a test suite, specifies it is a leaf node holding test cases, and frames it as a convenience alias for create_folder with type='suite'. This distinguishes it from the many folder-related siblings and makes the semantic of a 'suite' 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 explicitly says to use this tool when the user asks to 'create a suite', and it points to create_folder as the underlying mechanism. It also provides a key usage constraint: suites cannot live at root, so parentId is required. This gives the agent both selection guidance and a precondition.

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