Settings: create debtor

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

The description goes beyond annotations by explaining the non-idempotent behavior ('calling twice may create duplicates') and the lack of a delete endpoint ('can only be updated afterwards, never removed'). It also flags the write nature. This is valuable context not available from annotations alone.

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 moderately long but each sentence serves a purpose: it states the operation, distinguishes from the alternative, explains batch usage, warns about idempotency, and notes the lack of deletion. The use of bold headings and bullet-like phrasing keeps it scannable, though the initial broad statement about creating multiple record types is slightly extraneous.

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?

With an output schema present, the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers the essential operational details: batch capability, idempotency risk, deletion limitation, and the alternative tool. No critical information for correct invocation is missing.

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?

The schema already provides detailed field descriptions, but the tool description clarifies the batch usage: 'pass an array of debtors in debtors. A single record is an array of one.' This adds practical meaning beyond the schema's generic array description.

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 'Create a debtor account' and 'Use to create one or more customers,' providing a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool creditors_create, making it unambiguous which tool to select.

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?

It explicitly says 'For suppliers you buy from, use creditors_create' and advises checking debtors_list first due to non-idempotency. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, as well as a recommended pre-check.

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