Create Custom Activity

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (write operation) and destructiveHint=false. The description confirms it creates an activity, but adds no additional behavioral context such as required permissions, side effects, or what happens on success/failure. Given annotations already present, the description fails to provide extra transparency.

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 a single sentence, very concise and to the point. However, it uses the abbreviation 'E&A' which may not be immediately clear to all agents. It is front-loaded but could be slightly clearer. Still, it earns high marks for brevity.

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?

The tool has 3 required parameters all described in the schema, and no output schema. The description is minimal but covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks context about the E&A app, typical usage scenarios, or how the result is returned. For an agent, more completeness would help disambiguate from similar tools.

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%, with descriptions already provided for each parameter (color, icon_id, name). The description does not add any further meaning or usage guidance beyond what the schema offers. Therefore, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('a new custom activity'). It is specific enough to convey the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from similar siblings like 'fetch_custom_activity' or other 'create_*' tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. This is a significant gap for an AI agent deciding between tools.

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