Create Context

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the description does not need to cover safety. It adds the useful behavioral detail that the new context is returned. However, it does not disclose behavior for duplicate names, potential overwrites, or scope, leaving some ambiguity beyond what annotations provide.

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 short sentences with no fluff, front-loading the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, and it provides a clear, minimal statement of function and return value.

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 simple creation tool with full schema coverage and adequate annotations, the description covers the essential behavior (creates and returns). It could mention edge cases like duplicate names, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of annotations, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 already describes both parameters ('Context name' and 'Context value') with 100% coverage. The description's phrase 'key/value' aligns with the schema but adds no additional nuance or format details, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' and names the resource as 'named key/value context', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like lyzr_list_contexts, lyzr_get_context, lyzr_update_context, and lyzr_delete_context. The added clause 'Returns the new context' further clarifies the tool's purpose.

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 makes the strong contextual implication that this tool is for creating a new context, whereas siblings handle listing, retrieving, updating, or deleting. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or name alternative tools when not to use this one, so it falls short of a 5.

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