create_agent

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

Annotations only give destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it creates an entity and explains provider behavior, but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or behavior on duplicate agent_id.

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?

Main purpose is front-loaded, and the Args list is structured logically. The litellm context is useful but adds length; minor redundancy in describing requirements.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and provider guidance. Output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Missing edge-case behavior (e.g., conflict handling) but acceptable given 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description's Args section adds meaning by describing each parameter (e.g., provider options, model examples). However, some descriptions like 'policy_profile: JSON string' are brief, lacking format details.

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 explicitly states 'Create a first-class agent entity', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_agent, delete_agent, get_agent, and list_agents by focusing on creation.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use different providers, especially litellm for unsupported models. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare to siblings like update_agent for modifications.

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