create_experience

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does communicate that this is a mutating operation requiring write permission, which is useful. However, it says nothing about what the tool returns, whether the created entry becomes visible immediately, validation behavior, or side effects beyond insertion.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; both the action/resource and the permission requirement earn their place. It is not bloated, though it is very sparse.

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?

For a 10-parameter CRUD operation with no output schema, no annotations, and several undocumented fields, a two-clause definition is far from complete. An agent has no guidance on what the payload should look like beyond required names, what the response is, or how to confirm success.

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?

The description makes no mention of any of the 10 parameters, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema. Schema description coverage is only 40%, and fields like location, body_html, skill_ids, project_ids, and is_current remain unexplained; the description fails to compensate for this gap.

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?

States a single clear action ('Create') and a specific resource ('a new work experience entry'), which separates it from the get/update/delete/list siblings and from create_project/create_education/etc. The word 'new' also marks it as the insert operation, not an update.

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 the tool should be used when an agent needs to add a work-experience record, but it does not explicitly contrast this with update_experience for edits or list_experience for reads. The write-permission note is a prerequisite, not a full usage rule.

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