Create team

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Create' implies mutation, but the description does not state required inputs, uniqueness expectations for slug, side effects of assigning accounts, permission requirements, or what happens after creation. It is not misleading, but it is far too sparse.

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 and the main point is front-loaded. It earns its place by adding the account-assignment option beyond the title, though it is brief to the point of omitting useful context.

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 mutation tool with five parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. An agent is left without enough information about required parameters, side effects, or how this tool relates to sibling team tools such as add_team_account and update_team.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The phrase 'optionally assigning accounts' adds some meaning to accountIds, but it provides no semantic detail for name, slug, avatarUrl, or description. Parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but slug in particular needs clarification and does not receive it.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Create a team', and adds one key variant, 'optionally assigning accounts'. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from closely related sibling tools like add_team_account or update_team, so it is clear but lacks sibling differentiation.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is for creating a new team rather than updating an existing one, nor does it explain when the optional account assignment should be used instead of add_team_account.

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