Create a custom field

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions the HTTP method and content type, omitting critical behavioral details such as required permissions, side effects (e.g., irreversible creation), or error conditions. The agent cannot infer safety or constraints.

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 short at only three clauses, making it easy to scan. However, it sacrifices substance for brevity; for a tool with complex parameters, more front-loaded detail would be beneficial.

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 objects, multiple enum-dependent configs) and lack of output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the return value, error handling, or the relationship between parameters like type and config, which are critical for correct invocation.

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 description adds no parameter information beyond what is in the schema. Although the schema includes some inline notes (e.g., 'Required if type = currency'), the description itself does not explain the meaning of parameters or their relationships, leaving the agent to parse a complex nested schema with 0% description coverage.

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 the tool creates a custom field and provides the exact HTTP method and endpoint (POST /crm/funnels/{funnel_id}/custom-fields). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like weeek_create_a_custom_field_1 or weeek_create_a_custom_field_2, leaving ambiguity about when to use this specific variant.

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, nor are there any prerequisites, such as requiring a funnel to exist. The description lacks exclusions or context for appropriate usage.

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