zda_create_sla_policy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only lists common fields but does not discuss mutation effects, required permissions, idempotency, side effects, or constraints (e.g., duplicate creation behavior). This is insufficient for an agent to assess risks.

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: the first states the purpose, the second lists common fields. No filler or redundancy. Front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

The description lists common fields but omits details about return values (no output schema), error handling, or validation rules. Given the tool's complexity (nested object parameter), additional context on expected response or failure modes would improve completeness.

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 input schema describes the 'data' parameter generically, but the tool description adds specific field names relevant to sla_policies (title, description, filter, policy_metrics). This goes beyond the schema, giving the agent actionable details for constructing the payload. Schema coverage is 100%, but description still adds value.

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 a new Zendesk sla_policy', specifying the verb and resource. Among sibling create tools (e.g., create_automation, create_group), it distinctly identifies the SLA policy resource, allowing an agent to differentiate.

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 usage for creating an SLA policy but provides no explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_sla_policy, delete_sla_policy) or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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