create_global_source

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

Annotations already declare this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) that is not destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no auth/permission requirements, no idempotency or duplicate-handling behavior, no mention of what state the new source starts in.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the verb and resource lead. Slightly redundant with the schema since the component examples are repeated rather than adding new 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?

For a simple three-parameter create tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering the mutation profile, the description is minimally adequate. It still omits usage context and any post-creation behavior, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents 'type', 'source', and 'component'. The description repeats the component example values ('cart-droppable', 'popup') that the schema's component property already provides, adding no new meaning for 'source' or 'type'.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new global source component'), which is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_global_section or create_page. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with adjacent tools (e.g., update_global_source, create_global_section), so sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no indication of what happens to an existing source with the same name. The component type list is domain data rather than usage guidance.

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