create-security-suppression

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action (create) and a high-level purpose. It does not disclose side effects, permissions required, idempotency, or what happens to already collected signals, making it insufficient for behavioral understanding.

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 sentence of 14 words, front-loaded with the verb 'Create'. There is no unnecessary text, and it efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention return values, error states, or behavior when parameters conflict. For a creation tool with 7 parameters, this is insufficient for complete context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, so the tool description adds little extra semantic value. The description's mention of 'suppress signals matching a query' aligns with the schema but doesn't elaborate on parameter interplay. Baseline 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 tool creates a security monitoring suppression rule and its purpose to suppress signals. It distinguishes from siblings like get/delete/list-security-suppression. However, it could be more specific about the rule being used to suppress detections, but it's still strong.

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 (e.g., update-security-suppression). There is no mention of prerequisites, contexts, or scenarios, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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