Create Integration Package

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral context. It only states a permission requirement, omitting details about side effects, what happens if 'confirm' is false, or any other behavioral traits beyond creation.

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—a single sentence with no excess verbiage. It is appropriately front-loaded with the action. However, it could be slightly more efficient by integrating the permission note without the period.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, the nature of an integration package, or provide enough context for an AI agent to confidently invoke the tool correctly.

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 only 40%, and the tool description adds no parameter information. While the schema itself documents two parameters (id and confirm), the description does not clarify the meaning of name, shortText, or description, leaving semantic gaps.

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 integration package' with a specific verb and resource. The name and sibling tools (e.g., copy_integration_package, delete_integration_package) show distinction, as this tool handles creation exclusively.

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 only mentions a permission requirement ('Requires ALLOW_WRITE') but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like copy_integration_package, nor any exclusion criteria or context for typical scenarios.

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