create_request_attribute

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions it's a WRITE operation but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, duplicate handling, or authorization requirements. The agent is left to infer behavior from the name and schema.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. No unnecessary words, and all information is relevant. Achieves maximum conciseness without sacrificing clarity.

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?

No output schema, and the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., the created attribute or confirmation). Given the complexity of nested objects in the schema, the description is minimal and could provide more context about behavior or response, but it meets the minimum viability.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying the minimum required fields (name, dataType, dataSources), which is not fully captured by the schema (only name is required in schema). This helps the agent understand what must be included.

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?

Clearly states the action 'Create' and the resource 'request attribute', with an explicit note that it's a WRITE operation using classic Config API v1. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_request_attribute or delete_request_attribute.

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?

Implies usage by stating the minimum required fields (name, dataType, dataSources), but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus update_request_attribute or other create tools. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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