Create business

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

Annotations already communicate that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false). The description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic act of creating, such as side effects, ownership semantics, uniqueness requirements, or required location context.

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 with the action and resource front-loaded and no filler. It loses a point because it largely restates the title 'Create business,' contributing little new informational value.

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 create operation with 10 parameters, one required, no output schema, and low schema documentation, a one-sentence description is inadequate. Missing details include required field semantics, default locationId behavior, address field expectations, and what the created record looks like in response.

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 only 10% (only locationId has a description), yet the description mentions none of the 10 parameters. It does not clarify what 'name' must be, how address fields relate, or how locationId defaults work. The description must compensate for poor schema coverage but does not.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create a business (company) record.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like ghl_create_contact, ghl_create_opportunity, and ghl_create_appointment. No ambiguity remains about what entity this tool creates.

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 about when to use this tool instead of related tools such as ghl_update_business, ghl_get_business, or other create tools. There are no preconditions, exclusions, or alternative routing hints.

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