create_level

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

With no annotations supplied, the description must disclose behavior on its own. It honestly states that a new, empty level is created in the current project, but it does not cover side effects such as name collisions, whether an existing level can be overwritten, or any required project/session state. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the verb, object, and location with no filler or repetition. Every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter create operation with an output schema available, the description covers the essential context: what is created ('empty level'), where it is created ('current O3DE project'), and the action. It could add failure-mode or naming-constraint details, but nothing critical is missing for a basic call.

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 coverage for the only parameter is 0%, and the description adds no explicit explanation of the 'name' parameter beyond the schema's title. The parameter is simple enough that an agent can infer it is the level's name, but the low-coverage rule expects the description to compensate, and it does not.

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 names a specific action ('Create') and resource ('a new empty level'), and scopes it to 'the current O3DE project'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling operations such as load_level, save_level, and list_levels.

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 stated action implies its use case: creating a brand-new level in the current project. It gives clear context but does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, such as using save_level to persist or load_level to open an existing level.

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