create_gig

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'create and publish' without detailing potential side effects (e.g., immediate visibility, billing implications), authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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?

While the single sentence is brief, it is under-specified for a tool with 9 parameters. Conciseness should not come at the expense of completeness. A well-structured description would front-load key details; here, critical information is missing.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain return values, validation rules, failure behavior, or any lifecycle considerations. A minimal viable description would need to cover these aspects.

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 has only 22% description coverage (only title and gallery have descriptions). The description adds no parameter-level information. Many important parameters (category, subcategory, tags, packages, etc.) remain unexplained, leaving the agent to infer their meaning without guidance.

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 'Create and publish a new Fiverr gig' clearly identifies the verb (create and publish) and resource (Fiverr gig). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like update_gig, delete_gig, or pause_gig, which handle different operations on existing gigs.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication, account setup) or when not to use it (e.g., if editing an existing gig, use update_gig). The absence of any contextual usage advice reduces clarity.

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