create_cli_template_group

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'create' (write operation) and 'Returns: Created CLI template group', but does not disclose potential side effects, error handling, or whether the operation is idempotent. Limited transparency for a mutable action.

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?

Description is very short and frontloaded with the purpose. The use of 'Args:' and 'Returns:' provides a clean structure. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is already efficient.

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?

Simple creation tool with output schema available, so description covers basic purpose and parameters. However, it lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., does the ADOM need to exist?) and behavior on conflicts. Adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description provides basic mappings for each parameter (e.g., 'adom: ADOM name'). This adds some meaning beyond the raw schema, but lacks examples, constraints, or context about valid values, making it minimally helpful.

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 CLI template group' with a specific verb and resource. The name itself distinguishes it from sibling create tools for other entities like packages or scripts, making purpose unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name implies its purpose, but there is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is implied but not elaborated.

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