Create a tag

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

Annotations already cover non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world behavior, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds a useful lifecycle fact (tags must exist before use on posts) but does not disclose duplicate-handling behavior, response shape, or side effects beyond creation.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and scope; the second sentence adds important domain context that helps an agent sequence operations correctly.

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 create operation with two self-documenting parameters and no output schema, the description plus schema is largely complete. It could be slightly stronger by noting what happens if a tag with the same name already exists, given the idempotentHint, but that is a minor gap.

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 the parameter documentation already fully explains 'name' and 'publication'. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the 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 specific verb ('Create') and a clear resource ('a new tag on the publication'), and the domain rule about tags needing to exist before being put on a post helps distinguish this from tag-assignment tools like add_tag_to_post. Even without naming a sibling, the purpose is unambiguous.

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 sentence 'A tag must exist before it can be put on a post' gives a clear precondition and implies when create_tag should be used relative to post tagging. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses the full 5.

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