create_manual_run

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses important behaviors: requires write permission, explains selectionMode options, warns about tags format mismatch with list_manual_runs, and notes state normalization. This adds good context beyond the schema.

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 concise with 5 sentences covering essential points. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and permission. While not bulleted, the information density is good and no unnecessary words.

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 15 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects (permission, selectionMode, tags, state, note) but omits details about return value, some less common parameters (forecast, attachments), and potential error conditions. It is adequate for typical use but incomplete for edge cases.

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 description adds meaningful insights for several parameters: explains selectionMode's effect with 'all' vs 'selected', clarifies tags format (JSON array not comma-separated), and describes state normalization. This goes beyond the schema's enum and type info.

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 'Create a new manual test run.' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_manual_run or list_manual_runs by focusing on creation.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., when to use create_manual_run vs create_manual_test_case). It only mentions a write permission prerequisite, which is necessary but not comparative.

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