create_team

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without mentioning side effects (e.g., does it overwrite? require permissions?), error conditions, or return values. This is insufficient for safe agent invocation.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is too terse, omitting critical details. Conciseness is valued, but here it sacrifices completeness. A moderate score reflects its brevity without being verbose.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, annotations, and parameter details, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what happens upon success/failure, how the output is structured, or the expected schema of team_data. The tool's complexity (nested object parameter) demands more context.

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 has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not add any meaning to the 'team_data' parameter. It does not specify required fields, structure examples, or constraints, leaving the agent with no guidance on how to construct valid input.

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') and the resource ('a new team in OpenMetadata'), establishing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like create_user or create_database, but since siblings are distinct resources, that's acceptable. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_team or delete_team, nor any prerequisites or context. The description offers no usage instructions beyond the basic action.

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