create_friend_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It accurately describes the tool's creation behavior and folder handling, but lacks details on permissions, idempotency, error conditions, or side effects. For a creation tool this is minimal but not insufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences with no redundancy. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by crucial usage caveats. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

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 simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: what it creates, what it doesn't do (value setting), and folder behavior. It could mention error handling (e.g., duplicate names) but remains adequate for typical use.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the definition (values differ per friend) and the default behavior for folder_id (unclassified when omitted), going beyond the schema descriptions.

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 attribute definition for friends, distinguishing it from value-setting tools. It specifies the resource (friend info definition) and action (create), and differentiates from sibling tools by noting that value setting is not implemented in this connector.

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 states when to use this tool (to create a definition) and when not (value setting is separate and not available). It also explains the behavior of the folder_id parameter when omitted. This provides clear guidance on usage context.

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