create_python_script

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Create a Python script' without mentioning side effects (e.g., overwrites existing file if filename exists), permission requirements, or what happens on failure. This is minimal transparency.

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 no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. However, extreme conciseness compromises completeness. A 4 reflects efficient structure but not necessarily sufficient content.

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?

Despite having an output schema and 3 parameters (1 required), the description omits return value context, parameter explanations, and usage scenarios. This is severely incomplete for an agent to use correctly, especially with 0% schema coverage.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain any parameter: content (what it should contain), job_name (when to use), or filename (default and validation). Adding no parameter meaning leaves the agent guessing.

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 a Python script under the MCP work directory for Avizo Python runs. It uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('Python script'), and the context differentiates it from sibling tools like create_hx_script and create_python_script_object.

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 (e.g., create_python_script_object) or when not to use it. Lacks context about prerequisites, such as requiring Avizo to be installed or the script being runnable via run_avizo_python.

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