Create Documentation Agent

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-read-only operation. The description adds the creation context and the agent's purpose but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as response format, side effects beyond creation, or any dependencies.

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, concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words. It communicates the key information efficiently.

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 no output schema and is a create operation, the description would benefit from clarifying what the agent returns (e.g., agent ID) or any prerequisites like provider/model availability. The current description is adequate for basic selection but lacks this important contextual detail.

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 all six parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level semantics, leaving the schema to carry the burden. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a clear verb ('Create') with a specific resource ('new semantic-model documentation agent') and states its purpose ('generate table/column descriptions'). This distinguishes it from the generic sibling tool lyzr_create_agent.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need a documentation agent specifically for semantic models. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the specialized purpose and naming make the use case evident.

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