noark5_create_arkivskaper

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that a new entity is created and that the response includes the created arkviskaper's URL, which is useful. However, it does not mention credential requirements, potential duplicates, or other side effects beyond the obvious create operation.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose statement, an Args list, and a return statement. No filler or redundant content is present.

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 simple three-parameter creation tool, the description covers the parameters and the return behavior, and an output schema exists so detailed return values are not required here. It lacks usage context and any behavioral caveats, but the tool is simple enough that the description is mostly complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains arkviskaper_id as 'unique identifier,' navn as 'name,' and attributes as an optional JSON object with the optional field beskrivelse. This adds meaningful semantic value beyond the bare schema property names.

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 verb and resource: 'Create a new arkviskaper (archive creator).' It is distinguishable from sibling create-* tools by the explicit resource type, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with closely related alternatives.

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 about when to choose this tool over other create-* tools, nor any mention of prerequisites or context such as needing to create an archive creator before archival objects. The only usage signal is the implied 'create if that is what you want to do.'

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