swebsy_create_site

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool creates and opens a site, describes the template behavior, and reveals the asynchronous readiness requirement by instructing polling of swebsy_status until editorReady is true and siteId matches.

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 two sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, the templateId conditional is stated compactly, and the required post-call polling step is given in a clear, actionable way.

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 single-optional-parameter tool with no output schemaigator and no annotations, the description includes purpose, template behavior, and an explicit readiness-polling handoff. It does not describe the direct response shape or failure modes, but the polling instruction mitigates the most important operational gap.

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 100%: the single optional parameter templateId is already documented as optional and omittable for a blank site. The description adds a small increment by stating the template is imported unchanged, but the schema already carries the core semantic weight.

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 opens with 'Create a site and open it in Studio,' a specific verb and resource that distinguishes this tool from sibling creation tools like swebsy_create_page. It also clearly differentiates the blank-site and template-import paths.

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 explicit conditional usage: omit templateId for a standard blank site, or provide an installed template ID to import unchanged. It also directs the agent to poll swebsy_status before editing, providing a clear next-step workflow, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria.

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