create_topologysource

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only behavior; the description adds a meaningful authorization requirement ('requires write permission') and a format constraint. It does not describe return values or failure behavior when overwrite is false, but overwrite semantics are covered by the schema.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The core purpose and format are front-loaded, and the alternative tool is mentioned immediately after the primary use case.

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?

The description plus schema covers what is needed to invoke the tool: format, permission, overwrite behavior, and routing to the import alternative. It lacks return/error details, but there is no output schema and the nested definition shape may be documented elsewhere.

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 100%, so the baseline applies. The description adds some context by calling definition a 'full definition dict' and noting the REST API format, but it does not explain the nested definition structure or per-parameter behavior beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('Create'), resource ('TopologySource'), input form ('full definition dict'), and format ('REST API format'). Explicitly distinguishes this from import_topologysource, so an agent can select it unambiguously.

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?

Provides an explicit when-to-use signal: creating a TopologySource in REST API format. Also gives an explicit alternative with the condition for using it: 'For LM Exchange format, use import_topologysource.'

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