config_create_queue

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states that a queue is created. It does not mention potential side effects, required permissions, uniqueness constraints, idempotency, or how creation might affect existing resources. The mutation is implied but not elaborated.

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 extremely short, but conciseness should not come at the cost of all useful detail. 'Create a queue.' is under-specification rather than efficient writing, offering no structure or additional context to guide the agent.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, a required hours_of_operation_id, and numerous sibling configuration tools, the description is severely incomplete. It provides no operational context, no relationship to other resources like hours of operation or instances, and no explanation of expected behavior or output. The agent cannot use this description to correctly select or invoke the tool.

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 input schema has 5 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, yet the description adds absolutely no parameter-level detail. It fails to explain what 'name', 'region', 'description', 'instance_id', or 'hours_of_operation_id' mean or how they relate to queue creation. This is a complete 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?

The description 'Create a queue.' simply restates the tool name config_create_queue, adding no new information beyond the verb and resource already present in the name. It is a tautology and does not distinguish this create operation from the many sibling configuration tools.

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 such as config_describe_queue, config_update_queue_status, or list_queues. There is no mention of prerequisites, ordering, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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