passgage_create_slack

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention side effects, required permissions, validation, defaults, or the structure of a successful response. The agent gets no insight into what 'creating a slack' entails.

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 short sentence, so it is concise in word count. However, it lacks essential content, making it under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It earns a mid-range score because it is not verbose but also does not adequately inform.

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 nested object parameter with no meaningful schema, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what 'slack' is, what fields the 'data' object should contain, or what the expected outcome is. The tool cannot be reliably used based on this description alone.

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 has one parameter 'data' with the description 'The data for creating the slack', which is tautological and uninformative. Although schema description coverage is 100%, the tool description adds no parameter meaning, and the schema's own description does not clarify what fields are needed. The agent remains clueless about how to construct a valid request.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource as 'a new slack'. While 'slack' is not defined, the sibling tools list_slacks, get_slack, update_slack, and delete_slack clearly indicate it is a distinct resource type. This differentiates it from sibling CRUD actions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its alternatives (e.g., update_slack or delete_slack). It also lacks any prerequisites, context, or scenarios where creation is appropriate. No alternatives are mentioned.

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