frappe_create_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that Frappe auto-generates document names and that the created document is returned with its name and field values. This goes beyond just the schema by explaining system behavior, though it omits potential error conditions or permission requirements.

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 three sentences long, front-loading the core purpose and then providing key details. It is efficient and free of extraneous information, though a slightly more structured breakdown could further aid readability.

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's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description covers essential aspects: purpose, parameter usage (data object), auto-naming, and return value. It is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the tool, though it could benefit from clarifying error scenarios.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema (e.g., reiterating that data should contain field names and values, and that mandatory fields are required). It does not significantly enhance the schema's existing parameter descriptions.

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's purpose: 'Create a new document of the specified DocType with the provided field values.' It uses a specific verb ('create') and identifies the resource ('document'), and the context of sibling tools (frappe_delete_doc, frappe_get_doc, etc.) reinforces the distinction.

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 implicitly indicates when to use the tool (when a new document needs to be created), but it does not explicitly provide alternatives or conditions when not to use it. However, the sibling tools offer clear alternatives for other operations.

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