Create Schedule Rotation

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

Annotations already declare it non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds no behavior beyond that: no mention that retries will duplicate rotations (idempotentHint=false), that rotation members require a feature flag, that time_zone must match the schedule's, or any validation/rejection behavior.

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?

A single short sentence with no wasted clauses, but it is under-specified rather than efficient — nothing is front-loaded that an agent could not already read from the name.

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?

This is a nested create with an anyOf discriminator, a feature-gated members array, and cross-field time_zone constraints; the description covers none of it. The output schema excuse does not apply here because the gaps are on the input/behavioral side, not the return-value side.

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?

Only 2 top-level parameters but 50% schema description coverage, and the description contributes nothing — "from provided data" is filler. It does not explain the wrapper structure (type/attributes), the schedule_id requirement, or the anyOf branching in schedule_rotationable_attributes, which is the hardest part of the call to get right.

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?

"Creates a new schedule rotation" gives a clear verb and resource, but the rest ("from provided data") adds nothing and the sentence is essentially a restatement of the name/title. It does not distinguish this from siblings like update_schedule_rotation, list_schedule_rotations, or get_schedule_rotation, nor does it say what a rotation consists of.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus update_schedule_rotation or the schedule_rotation_active_day / schedule_rotation_user tools, and no mention of prerequisites (e.g., schedule nesting feature required for members). The agent must infer all routing from the name alone.

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