models-instantiate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool creates a new Case and includes items from plan item definitions, but does not mention side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy.

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 covers creation from a model and optional workspace assignment, but lacks information about return values, error conditions, or required permissions. Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no output schema), it leaves gaps.

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%, meaning all parameters have descriptions. The description adds marginal value by mentioning workspace_id for visibility, but otherwise does not augment the schema's parameter documentation.

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 verb 'Creates' and the resource 'a new Case from a published model', with additional detail about items from plan item definitions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cases-create or models-list_instances.

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 mentions passing workspace_id to make the case visible, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not differentiate from alternatives like cases-create or specify prerequisites (e.g., model must be published).

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