noark5_create_mappe

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states the create side effect and that the response includes details and the URL of the created mappe, which is helpful. However, it does not mention error behavior, required credentials, or what happens on invalid parent_url; this is a moderate gap for a mutation tool with zero annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then gives a compact parameter list. It is mostly efficient, though there is some redundancy in calling attributes 'Optional' and then saying 'All optional' again in the same bullet.

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 create operation with no annotations and a low-detail schema, the description covers the main requirements: what it creates, under which parents, all parameter meanings, and the shape of the return value. It could be more complete with an example JSON attributes string and error semantics, but it is adequate for correct invocation in most cases.

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 for the schema's silence. It does so by explaining all four parameters: parent_url, tittel, beskrivelse, and attributes, and it enumerates the accepted optional attribute keys. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare input schema.

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 'Create a new mappe (file) under a parent entity', naming the specific verb, resource, and the allowed parent types (arkivdel, klasse, or mappe). It does not explicitly contrast it with siblings like noark5_create_saksmappe or noark5_create_klasse, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 clear context by specifying where a mappe can be created: under an arkivdel, klasse, or mappe. It does not enumerate exclusions or explicitly route away from sibling create tools, but the parent-type constraint gives the agent enough context to select this tool appropriately.

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