planner_create_bucket

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a mutation but says nothing about required permissions, whether the bucket is returned, or what happens on failure — a significant gap for a write tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 short sentence with no filler, but it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than efficient. Nothing is front-loaded beyond the bare purpose.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description should explain prerequisites and return behavior. As written, an agent knows only the name of the action.

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 description coverage is 0% for two required parameters. "in a plan" loosely hints that plan_id identifies the parent plan, but neither plan_id's format nor name's constraints (uniqueness, length, ordering) are explained anywhere.

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 a specific verb and resource ("Create a bucket") plus scope ("in a plan"), which distinguishes it from planner_list_buckets and planner_create_task. It lacks any explicit sibling differentiation, but the verb+resource pairing is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to create a bucket versus using planner_list_buckets first, no prerequisites (e.g. must the caller be a plan member?), and no mention of duplicates or naming constraints. The agent must infer all usage context.

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