passgage_create_access_zone

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'Create a new access_zone,' which only restates the tool's name without detailing side effects, required permissions, id generation, or response behavior. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or redundancy, making it easy to parse. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, though it does clearly state the core 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?

The tool has a nested open data object, no annotations, and no output schema, making substantial context necessary. The description fails to explain the data object's structure, constraints, or invocation context, leaving a critical gap for an agent trying to construct a valid call.

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 describes the only parameter 'data' as 'The data for creating the access_zone,' which is circular and unhelpful. The tool description adds no information about the required fields within the data object, and because additionalProperties is true, the agent has no structural guidance for constructing valid input.

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 'Create a new access_zone' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating what the tool does. Although it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling create_* tools, the resource name is unambiguous and the action is distinct from list/get/update/delete siblings.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_access_zone or delete_access_zone. The description omits any context about prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage purely from the name.

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