models-create_from_stage

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

With no annotations, the description provides substantial behavioral context: it extracts specific item types, preserves sentry connections, and creates a model with no references to the source. It does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., whether the stage is modified) or permissions needed, but overall it is helpful.

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 four sentences and covers key points without unnecessary words. It could be improved with bullet points for easier scanning, but it is efficient and front-loaded.

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 description explains what is extracted and what is excluded, but lacks details about the output model structure (since no output schema) and error conditions (e.g., missing or empty stage). Some context is missing for a complete understanding.

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%, so parameters are already well-described in the schema. The tool description adds no extra parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so 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 tool creates a new draft model from an existing stage, specifying exactly which CMMN items are extracted and which are excluded. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like models-create or models-instantiate.

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 implies usage when you want a model based on a stage's CMMN items but does not explicitly state when not to use, compare with alternatives, or mention prerequisites like stage existence. Guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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