create_registration_form

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key behaviors: the form is public, the URL gets stored in the draft, and the operation takes ~30s. It does not explain reversibility, permission requirements, or failure behavior, but the stated side effects and latency give meaningful insight beyond the schema.

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 succinct sentences convey purpose, usage, and a critical behavioral note in under 30 words. Every part earns its place; no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 description provides purpose, usage trigger, side effect, and timing. It omits operational details like required authentication, error handling, and how event_format affects the form, but given the schema covers parameters and the overall scope is narrow, it is reasonably complete. The draft integration is a key context that prevents ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100%—all three parameters (title, folder_id, event_format) have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra semantic context for the parameters, so it rests at the baseline of 3 without enhancing or detracting from the schema's clarity.

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 identifies a specific action ('Create a public Google registration Form'), the resource (Google Form), and a follow-up side effect ('store its URL in the draft'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'set_registration_link' and 'draft_event' by focusing on form creation and draft integration.

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?

Explicitly states the condition for use: 'Use when the organizer has no Meetup/Luma link.' This tells the agent exactly when to choose this tool over alternatives, providing a clear decision rule.

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