create_animal

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

No annotations provided. The description states it creates, implying mutation, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, idempotency, or what happens on duplicate. The output schema exists but return behavior is not described.

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 with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains the parameter. Well front-loaded and 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?

The description covers the parameter and basic purpose, but lacks information on return values (despite an output schema existing) and error handling. For a create tool, the absence of behavioral context leaves gaps.

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 0%, but the description explains 'animal_json' is a JSON object string matching ezyVet's animal schema with minimum fields 'name' and 'species_id'. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema's type and title.

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 it creates a new animal (patient) using a JSON string. The verb 'Create' and resource 'animal' are specific. It doesn't contrast with siblings like 'update_animal', but the purpose is 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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'update_animal' for modifications). No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The agent must infer context from the tool name alone.

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