create_point

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

The description adds little beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate a mutating operation (readOnlyHint=false) with a destructive hint, but the description does not clarify whether creating points overwrites existing data or is purely additive. It also omits side effects or return behavior, though output schema exists.

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 concise sentence of eight words that front-loads the core action. It contains no redundant information or filler.

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 tool's simplicity, one parameter, and the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the core purpose adequately. The missing behavioral details are partially offset by annotations, and the brief nature is acceptable for this low-complexity operation.

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 only parameter, 'coordinates', has no schema description. The description compensates by explaining that the input is 'one or more points at [x, y] coordinates', conveying the structure of the array of number pairs, which is essential semantic content beyond the raw schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Create', identifies the resource 'points', and defines the coordinate format [x, y]. This clearly differentiates it from sibling creation tools like create_line and create_polygon.

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, no prerequisites, and no context about the active model or coordinate system. The description only states the action with no exclusions or conditions.

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