instrumentation_group_create

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already indicates state modification. The description confirms creation but adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., side effects, permissions, or reversibility).

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, concise but lacking essential details. It is front-loaded but provides minimal 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's complexity (two complex optional parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficient for an agent to understand how to correctly invoke the tool. Missing parameter structure and return behavior.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and three parameters, the description only hints at the 'name' parameter but provides no details about the breakpoints and tracepoints objects, leaving agents to guess their structure.

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 tool creates a named group for breakpoints/tracepoints with a specific use case (smoke evidence). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_breakpoint and instrumentation_group_clear.

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 implies usage for smoke testing but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus adding individual breakpoints or tracepoints. No mention of prerequisites or context.

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