create_queue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses only that a queue is created. It does not state what happens on a name collision, whether creation is idempotent, what permissions are required, or the effect of the durable/vhost defaults.

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 a single four-character phrase, which is maximally concise and front-loaded but borders on under-specification rather than efficient brevity. It contains no wasted words but also almost no information.

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?

For a mutation tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description omits the vhost/durable defaults' implications and any note about name uniqueness or required permissions. It is not sufficient for an agent to call this tool correctly in edge cases without opening the schema.

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%, and each parameter (name, vhost, durable) already has a description and defaults in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description itself adds no meaning 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?

创建队列 states a clear verb+resource, so an agent immediately knows this creates a queue. However, it says nothing to distinguish it from the many sibling create_* tools (create_user, create_exchange, create_vhost, create_binding) beyond its resource name, and the description is essentially a restatement of the tool name.

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 tool, no prerequisites (e.g. the vhost must exist), and no mention of alternatives such as create_exchange for other entity types. The agent must infer everything 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.