Create Feature Flag

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

The description adds no behavioral traits beyond what annotations already indicate. While annotations show this is a non-readOnly, non-destructive operation, the description does not mention side effects, uniqueness constraints on the flag key, or any error conditions. It simply restates the title.

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 sentence with no wasted words, making it extremely concise and front-loaded. It conveys the core purpose clearly, though it borders on being too 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 tool with 8 parameters, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain what the tool returns, what happens on duplicate keys, or any behavioral details. The rich schema offsets some gaps, but the description itself adds very little context.

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% (all 8 parameters have descriptions in the schema), so the baseline is 3. The description itself provides no parameter-specific semantics, but it does not need to compensate for missing schema info.

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 new feature flag' uses a specific verb and identifies the resource (feature flag). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update/delete/get feature flags by indicating the create operation, though it does not add additional scope or context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_feature_flag or list_feature_flags. The only implied usage is the verb 'create,' which is minimal and does not cover prerequisites, exclusions, or common use cases.

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