aap_create_team

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, matching the create action. The description adds the return format (JSON with created team id and name) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as required permissions or idempotency. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and uses a clean Args/Returns structure with no filler. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 simple create operation, the description covers the action, inputs, and output. The return format is specified. It could mention that the organization must exist, but the organization_id parameter implicitly covers this. Overall, it's complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 schema has 0% field descriptions, but the description's Args section enumerates the three fields: 'Team name, organization_id, description.' This adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, clarifying the intent of the nested params object, but it does not explain constraints or relationships beyond what the schema already provides.

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 AAP team within an organization,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like aap_update_team and aap_delete_team by focusing solely on creation. The return type is also mentioned.

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 usage is implied by the verb 'Create' and context 'within an organization,' but the description does not explicitly discuss alternatives or exclusions (e.g., when to use aap_update_team instead). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, so it's adequate but not strong.

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