create_item

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds that all cells are saved with the row, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not discuss other side effects, permissions, or failure behavior.

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 concise sentences front-load the core purpose, then provide critical mapping and routing guidance. There is no redundant or filler wording.

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 9-parameter creation tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, the description covers the most complex part (`cells` mapping) and the required context via schema plus the tool name. It could mention what the created item response looks like, but the description is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 only 11%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the non-obvious `cells` parameter as a mapping from columnId to value and directs the agent to `get_board_schema` for IDs. Other parameters rely mostly on self-explanatory names like `title`, `status`, `priority`, and `dueDate`.

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 'Create an item (row) with all of its data in one call', identifying the specific action and resource. It also distinguishes the tool from the sibling `set_cell` by noting that set_cell is only for later edits.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use `get_board_schema` to obtain column IDs and to use `set_cell` only for later edits. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and points to relevant alternatives.

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