create_website

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal a key side effect: 'Provisions storage and pull zone automatically.' However, it does not mention other consequences such as idempotency, failure behavior, or what happens if the name 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 two sentences, front-loads the core action, and includes a useful example. It is concise with no wasted words.

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?

The tool has a simple 2-parameter schema and no output schema, and the description explains the creation and provisioning behavior. However, it doesn't describe the return value or post-creation state, which would be helpful for an agent to confirm success.

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 100%, with both name and storage_region fully described in the schema. The description adds only a usage example for the name parameter and doesn't contribute additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 action: 'Create a new website with CDN hosting' and adds specifics about automatic provisioning of storage and pull zone. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_website or publish_site.

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 creating websites but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. The example gives a natural-language trigger, but no explicit 'use this when' guidance is present.

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