create_agent

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely restates the tool's purpose without detailing side effects, permission requirements, irreversibility, or what the response will look like 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 a single, direct sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no redundant or filler content, earning a perfect score.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It does not indicate what the tool returns, any prerequisites (like required 'name'), or what 'custom role and behavior' entails for the agent's configuration.

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 coverage is 100% with all 7 parameters having descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'custom role and behavior' adds no meaningful parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'systemPrompt' definition).

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 action ('Create'), the resource ('a new AI agent'), the platform ('DreamingAI'), and the key configurable aspect ('custom role and behavior'). This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_conversation or create_prompt.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for creating a new agent, as opposed to updating or deleting one. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., update_agent for modifications) or exclusions, so it falls short of full guidance.

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