Create a custom field

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond stating it's a POST request that creates a custom field. It does not disclose idempotency, permission requirements, side effects (e.g., if a field already exists), or post-creation behavior. With no annotations, this leaves a significant gap.

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 very brief (one line), but this brevity comes at the cost of useful information. It is under-specified and fails to provide essential context, such as the purpose of tags or the format of the request body.

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 (nested input schema, no output schema, 2 parameters) and the abundance of sibling tools, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the board context, the types of custom fields, or the significance of the 'config' object, leaving the agent uncertain about correct usage.

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 0% schema description coverage, meaning the description adds no explanatory value for the parameters. It does not clarify the role of 'body' vs 'path', or the complex 'config' object, which is critical for correct invocation.

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 'Create a custom field' and provides the HTTP method and endpoint, establishing the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like weeek_create_a_custom_field and weeek_create_a_custom_field_3, which share similar names.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, and the existence of multiple custom field creation tools (weeek_create_a_custom_field, weeek_create_a_custom_field_3) is not addressed.

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