create_script_include

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description's mention of 'Create' aligns. The requirement for SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true adds behavioral context. However, it does not disclose what happens if the prerequisite is not met, whether duplicates are allowed, or what the return value/response looks like.

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 sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and a critical condition. No unnecessary words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 full schema descriptions and annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and a prerequisite. However, it does not address potential errors, idempotency (despite annotations), or what the output looks like. It is minimally complete but could be more thorough.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the tool description does not need to add parameter details. It adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 'script include', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_script_include or update_script_include. It also mentions a key prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true), adding useful context.

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 a single condition (requires SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true) which is helpful, but it does not offer guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_script_include) or when not to use it. No explicit comparisons or exclusions.

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