create_file

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

Annotations already declare the mutation safety profile, including non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying that the file is empty and editable and that write_file should be used for content, though it does not explain duplicate-name handling or permission requirements.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by key parameter and workflow guidance. Every sentence provides useful information without wasting space.

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 creation tool with annotations covering safety and schema providing required fields and patterns, the description supplies the key non-obvious context. It could be more complete about duplicate handling or error conditions, but it is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description needs to compensate. It clarifies that name is a filename rather than a path and that parentFolderId should be omitted for the project root, but it does not explain projectId or add details about parameter formats beyond the schema patterns.

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 states a specific verb and resource: create an empty editable text file. It also distinguishes the tool from write_file by clarifying that the created file is empty and should be populated afterward with write_file.

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?

It gives clear usage context, including omitting parentFolderId for the project root and using write_file afterward to add content. It does not explicitly state when not to use it versus upload_file or other alternatives, but the main workflow is clear.

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