Create section

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility but only states the basic operation. It omits details like permission requirements, idempotency, error conditions (e.g., duplicate names), or whether the mutation is reversible, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 sentence with no filler words, directly conveying the essential action and optional behavior. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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 absence of output schema and annotations, the description should disclose more behavioral context such as whether the section is appended by default, how position conflicts are resolved, or the response structure. The current description is too sparse for a create operation.

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 description adds no parameter details beyond the schema, but the phrase 'optionally at a chosen position' alludes to the insert_after/insert_before parameters. Schema coverage is 75%, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the missing name parameter description is not compensated.

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 a specific verb 'Add' and resource 'section to a project', directly matching the tool's name and purpose. It also mentions optional positioning, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like section_update or section_reorder.

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 main description implies its use when creating a section, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like section_update or project_list_sections. However, the parameter description for project_gid hints at a workflow using asana_find, providing some contextual guidance.

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