linear_createDocument

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic create action, omitting critical behavioral details such as whether creation is idempotent, what permissions are needed, or what side effects occur (e.g., automatic associations).

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 extremely concise (5 words), but it sacrifices completeness. For an 8-parameter tool, the description should provide more context while remaining efficient. This is under-specified.

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 complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the purpose of optional fields like projectId or initiativeId, and does not clarify the return value or behavior.

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%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the baseline. A score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not enhance understanding of parameters.

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 'Create a new Linear document' clearly states the action (create) and the resource (Linear document). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like linear_createIssue or linear_createProject, though it could be more explicit about the scope.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., linear_createComment, linear_createIssue). There is no mention of prerequisites or context for creating a document.

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