bookstack_users_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions creating a user account but fails to describe critical behaviors: whether this requires admin permissions, if the user receives an email (only hinted via 'send_invite' parameter), what happens on duplicate emails, or the response format. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the main action, though it could be slightly more structured by separating core functionality from optional features.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits (e.g., permissions, error handling), output format, and usage guidelines. Given the complexity of user creation, this leaves the agent under-informed about critical aspects.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 6 parameters. The description adds minimal value by listing 'email, name, and role assignments' as key attributes, but this doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 reflects adequate but not enhanced parameter understanding.

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 action ('Create a new user account') and specifies key attributes ('with email, name, and role assignments'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'bookstack_users_update' beyond the obvious 'create' vs 'update' distinction, which prevents a perfect score.

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 alternatives like 'bookstack_users_update' or 'bookstack_users_list', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., required permissions) or contextual constraints. It merely states what the tool does without usage context.

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