sassy_mkdir

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

The 'missing parents' behavior is disclosed, but there is no mention of error handling, idempotency, or side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but remains thin.

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, grammatically correct sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and object. No wasted words.

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 low-complexity tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and recursive behavior. It could mention idempotency, but the tool is simple enough that this is sufficient.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for the 'path' parameter, and the description does not explain path semantics (absolute/relative, existence behavior). The parameter name 'path' is self-explanatory but the description adds no value 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Create a directory' and adds an important scoping detail: 'and any missing parents.' This distinguishes it from sibling file operations like read/write/list.

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?

The description implies this is for ensuring a directory path exists, which is clear enough. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives such as using the shell to run mkdir or mention when not to use it.

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