Ghl Create Tag

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The 'WRITES to the live account' statement meaningfully discloses that this is a mutating operation with real-world side effects. However, it omits other behavioral details such as auth requirements, idempotency, or reversibility.

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 efficiently structured with the action front-loaded and the side-effect warning following immediately. Every sentence earns its place, though it leans toward under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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 2-parameter create tool with zero annotation coverage and 0% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. The output schema covers return values, but the location_id parameter semantics are unaddressed, leaving an agent guessing about a valid call.

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 must compensate, but it explains neither parameter. While 'name' is self-evident as the tag's name, 'location_id' is unexplained — an agent doesn't know what it represents or when to supply it in the GHL context.

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 (Create) and resource (contact tag), making the tool's purpose clear. It is distinguishable from siblings like create_pipeline, create_workflow, and create_contact, though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling to contrast against.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to prefer ghl_create_tag over ghl_create_contact or other create tools, and gives no exclusions or context for selection.

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