create_survey_version

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

The description discloses that the tool creates a version and can publish it immediately. Annotations only provide destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by explaining the publishing behavior. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., requiring a valid surveyId, effect on existing versions) or error conditions.

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 sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence provides essential information.

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 tool has 4 parameters (1 required) and no output schema. The description covers creation behavior and the published flag but does not indicate what the response returns (e.g., version ID or object). Given the lack of output schema, this information would be helpful for an agent to handle the result. Also, no mention of prerequisite conditions or error scenarios.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that the 'version' parameter is a raw payload and that explicit arguments override matching keys, which is not obvious from the schema. It also clarifies the default for 'published'. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 tool creates a survey version, distinguishes between draft and published via the 'published' parameter, and mentions that additional fields can be supplied. This verb+resource combination is unambiguous and differentiates from siblings like list_survey_versions or get_survey_version.

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 explains that versions are drafts by default and that setting published=true immediately publishes, providing clear context on how to control behavior. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but no direct alternative for creating a version exists among siblings, so the guidance is adequate.

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