Create a new Kafka topic to enable message streaming. Define topic name, partitions, and replication factor for data organization.
mutate / control_plane / CREATE
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "create_topic"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations and a vague description, the tool's behavior is entirely opaque. The word 'mutate' implies creation, but there is no disclosure of side effects, permissions, or error conditions (e.g., topic already exists).
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 extremely concise but at the expense of clarity. It uses only a few words, which is not an example of good conciseness because it omits essential 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 lack of parameters, output schema, and annotations, the description is the sole source of context. It fails to provide any meaningful information about the tool's purpose, behavior, or expected outcomes.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema provides full coverage trivially. However, the description adds no value; it does not explain what the tool does beyond the name. A baseline of 4 is not warranted because purpose is unclear.
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 'mutate / control_plane / CREATE' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name without specifying the actual operation. It does not explain what creating a topic entails, nor does it distinguish from sibling tools like delete_topic or alter_topic_config.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as alter_topic_config or delete_topic. The description fails to indicate prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.