create_csm_case

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

Annotations already indicate that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), non-destructive, and non-idempotent. The description adds the permission requirement 'WRITE_ENABLED=true', which is useful but does not significantly expand on behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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, short sentence that conveys the purpose and a key prerequisite with no unnecessary words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded with essential 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 and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the basic purpose and a permission requirement but lacks details on return values, typical usage patterns, or how it fits with other CSM tools. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, meaning all 9 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'Customer Service case', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_csm_case, update_csm_case, and close_csm_case. The tool name and description align perfectly.

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 mentions a prerequisite condition 'requires WRITE_ENABLED=true', which guides the agent on when to use this tool. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or compare it to alternative tools.

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