Create a map

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one meaningful side effect: the tool also creates a MapInfos entry, which is useful. However, it omits whether an existing file is overwritten, what defaults are applied, permission requirements, or what happens on name collision.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the key artifact (empty map file) is stated immediately. It is efficient, though arguably terse to the point of under-specification given the parameter gaps.

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 file-creating tool with no annotations, no output schema, and five undocumented parameters, the description is not complete enough. It states the outcome but leaves callers without the usage and parameter detail they need to invoke it correctly.

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?

Five parameters with 0% schema description coverage and the description adds nothing about any of them. It never explains width/height bounds, the role of tilesetId (required), parentId semantics, or whether name is optional/auto-generated, so an agent gets no help from the description.

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 states a specific verb (Create) and resource (an empty map file plus its MapInfos entry), which is more informative than the title alone. It clearly distinguishes from deletion/list siblings, but it never explains how it differs from the closely related 'make_map' sibling, leaving that ambiguity unresolved.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use create_map versus alternatives such as make_map, or whether it should precede set_map_properties/set_tiles. No prerequisites, ordering, or exclusions are given.

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