network_create

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the useful detail that a one-time default password is returned, which is significant because there is no output schema. However, it does not disclose side effects, prerequisites, or what happens to the created network beyond being a basic create operation.

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 short sentences with no filler: it states the operation and immediately gives the key return value. Every word adds value, and the useful return information is front-loaded.

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 rich schema covers parameters well, and the description covers the return value, which is helpful given the absence of an output schema. Still, for a mutating create tool with no annotations, the description could say more about when a network is private, whether creation is idempotent, or how the one-time password should be handled. It is adequate but not complete.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with meaningful descriptions for all seven parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning, such as clarifying how unitId or hostUri relate to the created network.

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 clear action and resource: 'Create a network.' It also states what the call returns, namely networkId and a one-time default password. The verb 'create' cleanly distinguishes this from sibling network_get, network_update, network_delete, network_list, and network_count tools.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an existing unit or host URI. An agent must infer usage entirely from the verb and parameter names.

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