create_seat_offering

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

Goes well beyond annotations by explaining non-idempotency, live-school mutation risk, server-side auth injection, throttling under 30-per-10s, retry behavior on 429/5xx, and detailed HTTP error mappings. This fully aligns with the annotations and adds substantial operational context.

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 organized into labeled sections (Behavior, Parameters, Returns, Use when) and front-loaded with a clear one-line summary. No sentence is wasted; the length is justified by the operational caveats and error semantics.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description covers the return format, error behavior, prerequisites, related tools, auth, throttling, and non-idempotency. The only remaining details are the body fields themselves, which are fully documented in the input schema.

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 is 100% and the body schema already documents each field. The description adds important meaning by saying the entire payload goes in a single body argument, is forwarded verbatim, and that body is effectively required even though the spec marks it optional.

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?

States clearly that the tool creates a new seat offering, with the endpoint POST /v2/seats and an explicit WRITE label. This distinguishes it from the related get/update/delete seat tools by naming the specific create operation and resource.

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 a dedicated 'Use when' section saying to use this only when the user asked to create this, and advises checking with a read tool first. It names several related seat tools, though it does not explicitly say to use update_seat_offering for modifications, so it is slightly incomplete as an alternatives guide.

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