create_lane

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It implies a write operation (`Create`) but does not mention permissions, side effects, reversibility, or what happens if a lane with the same title already exists. For a mutation tool, this is a significant omission.

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, concise sentence with no filler. It states the core action and context directly, and the essential information is front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 simple create operation with a schema that fully describes parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., the created lane object), and it lacks usage guidance, which is partly captured under other dimensions. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description could be more informative but is not severely deficient.

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 four parameters (`title`, `board_id`, `wip_limit`, `sort_order`). The description adds no additional meaning about parameters, so the 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 action (`Create`) and the resource (`a new lane (swimlane)`) and specifies the scope (`on a board`), making it easy to identify the tool's purpose. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like `create_column` or `update_lane`, but the resource name is unambiguous enough that an agent would not confuse it.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `list_lanes`, `update_lane`, or `delete_lane`. It does not state any prerequisites, such as needing an existing board, nor does it explain when creation is appropriate. The intended usage 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.