admin_injects_create_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Create a new inject template' and 'White team only.' It does not mention side effects, return value, validation, or permissions beyond the white team hint. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient disclosure.

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 sentence with zero waste. It states purpose and access restriction in just eight words, achieving high conciseness without fluff.

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?

Given three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., the created template), any validation rules (e.g., max_score bounds), or the effect of duplication. The name and schema carry most of the load, leaving gaps in operational understanding.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema already handles parameter documentation.

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 verb and resource: 'Create a new inject template.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update/delete/get templates. The 'White team only' note also hints at the access context.

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?

It is clear that the tool is for creating a new template, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives (e.g., for editing, use update_template). 'White team only' gives a usage restriction, but no exclusions are stated.

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