create_system_advanced

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 does disclose meaningful behavior for a mutation tool: upsert-by-title semantics and that unprovided fields remain unchanged on existing systems. It omits permissions/auth requirements, whether it returns the resulting object, and any rate limits or side effects, leaving notable gaps.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, and only three sentences with no filler. The second and third sentences overlap on update behavior and could be merged, but nothing is wasteful.

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 nine-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key upsert/merge semantics but says nothing about return values, required permissions, or differentiation from the sibling create_system. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 all nine parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's note about title being the matching identifier duplicates the schema's own wording and adds no new syntax or format meaning beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (create or update a data system) and qualifies it with 'extended details', making the tool's scope clear. However, it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling create_system or explains what 'extended' means relative to it, so an agent must infer the difference.

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 explains matching behavior ('If a system with the given title already exists, it will be updated') but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over the sibling create_system or update paths. Choosing between the advanced and basic create variants is left entirely to inference.

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