Create Zone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds genuinely valuable behavioral context beyond the bare operation: the Tag Manager 360 prerequisite and the failure mode in standard containers. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as permission requirements, side effects, or idempotency, leaving gaps for a mutating 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 two tight sentences with zero waste. The primary purpose is front-loaded first, and the critical constraint and failure condition follow immediately. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists and all parameters are fully documented in the input schema, so those burdens are already met. The description supplies the two missing pieces: the core purpose and the critical 360 prerequisite/failure mode. It is complete enough for correct invocation, though it omits alternative routing for non-360 containers.

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% across all four required parameters, including a rich example showing the nested zone object structure with name, childContainer, and boundary fields. Per the baseline rule, the description earns a 3 since it adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, and the schema fully covers the ground.

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 opens with 'Create a zone in a workspace,' a specific verb+resource+location construction that clearly identifies the operation. The zone resource is distinct from every sibling create_* tool (create_container, create_workspace, create_folder, etc.), and the Tag Manager 360 note adds distinguishing context.

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 gives clear, actionable guidance: 'Zones require Tag Manager 360' and 'Creating one in a standard container fails.' This is an explicit when-not condition that helps the agent avoid a doomed call, though it does not name a specific alternative tool to use instead.

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