Create an agent

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by stating the authorization class (board_or_agent). However, it does not disclose whether creation triggers side effects (e.g., agent initialization) or what happens after creation.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. It is concise but at the cost of completeness; every sentence earns its place, but it could be more informative without being verbose.

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 the high complexity (many nested parameters, output schema present), the description is too brief. It does not summarize key fields or the overall effect of the operation. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but the description lacks completeness for the input side.

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%. The description adds no explanation of the many complex parameters (e.g., permissions, runtimeConfig, instructionsBundle). The schema is self-documenting to some extent, but the description fails to provide any semantic context beyond what is in the JSON 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 creates an agent, with the verb 'Create' and resource 'agent'. It does not differentiate from other agent creation tools among siblings (e.g., pc_post_companies_by_company_id_agent_hires), 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. It only mentions the authorization class. There is no 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' context, leaving the agent to infer usage 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.