executions_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses one important behavior (state field is system-managed and silently ignored) but fails to describe other behaviors such as what happens upon creation, required parameters, idempotency, or error handling. This is insufficient for a tool with 9 parameters.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded, but it is too brief to be effective. The 'Tag: Executions' line adds little value. The conciseness comes at the cost of missing critical 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?

Given the tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a complex domain (executions), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the purpose of an execution, the meaning of required parameters like testsCycleId or testCaseId, or the return value. An agent would struggle to use this tool correctly.

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 has 9 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no explanations for any parameter. The only parameter mentioned (state) is not even in the schema. The agent receives no guidance on what each parameter means or how to use them.

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 states 'Create execution' which is a verb+resource but lacks specificity on what an execution is and how it differs from sibling tools like executions_run or executions_finish. The additional context about state and alternative endpoints helps but does not fully clarify the tool's purpose.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (for creation) and directs to alternative endpoints for driving transitions (run, pause, finish). It also warns that the state field is ignored, which is a useful usage guideline. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool.

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