miro_create_text

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

Annotations are minimal (only title), providing no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is idempotent, required permissions, or side effects. Given the lack of annotation support, the description should have provided more 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 extremely concise: two sentences plus a list of use cases. Every sentence provides distinct and valuable information without redundancy or verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 params, 2 required), the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage, and alternatives. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values. Minor lack of behavioral transparency prevents a perfect score.

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% with all 8 parameters described. However, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's minimal descriptions (e.g., 'X position', 'Text color'). Baseline of 3 is appropriate as per guidelines when coverage is high but description adds no extra value.

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 tool's purpose: 'Add free-floating text to a Miro board with no background or border.' It explicitly distinguishes this tool from siblings miro_create_sticky and miro_create_doc, providing specific differentiators.

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 explicitly states when to use alternatives: 'For notes with colored backgrounds, use miro_create_sticky. For rich Markdown documents, use miro_create_doc.' It also provides example user intents like 'add a title', 'put heading text', which guides the AI agent effectively.

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