clickup_doc_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the doc starts with no pages (important behavioral detail), mentions optional parent attachment, and describes the return value. However, it doesn't cover permissions needed, error conditions, rate limits, or whether this is a mutating operation (though 'Create' implies mutation).

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 perfectly front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by important behavioral details (no pages initially, parent attachment option), and ends with return value information. Every sentence earns its place with zero wasted words.

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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by explaining the initial state (no pages), attachment options, and return value. However, it could better address mutation implications and error scenarios given the lack of structured safety annotations.

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 schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it mentions optional parent attachment and workspace root default, but these are already covered in the parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Create a new ClickUp doc'), resource ('in a workspace'), and distinguishes it from siblings by mentioning 'add pages via clickup_doc_add_page' and contrasting with other doc-related tools like clickup_doc_list and clickup_doc_get.

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 provides clear context about when to use this tool ('Create a new ClickUp doc in a workspace') and mentions an alternative action for adding pages ('add pages via clickup_doc_add_page'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or compare it to other creation tools like clickup_folder_create or clickup_list_create.

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