ghl_location_create_custom_value

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

Annotations already indicate that the tool is not read-only, not destructive, not idempotent, and open-world. The description adds the OAuth scope (locations/customValues.write), which is a behavioral requirement beyond schema. However, it does not disclose effects like duplicate handling or whether the operation replaces existing values, so additional context is minimal.

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 brief and front-loaded with the purpose. It includes useful technical details (endpoint, OAuth scopes) but repeats the title in the text. Overall, it is concise and to the point, though minor redundancy exists.

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 that the tool has two parameters (one nested) and siblings for CRUD, the description lacks integration guidance. It does not explain what the tool returns (no output schema), nor does it differentiate when to use this versus other custom value tools. The minimal description leaves gaps for effective usage.

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%, and the description merely restates the schema information (e.g., 'Request body (schema carried verbatim)'). It adds no extra meaning, such as constraints on name/value or examples beyond the schema's examples.

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 'Create Custom Value', and the tool name includes 'location_create_custom_value', which unambiguously indicates the action (create) and resource (custom value for a location). The endpoint path further reinforces this. It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like 'update_custom_value' or 'delete_custom_value' by specifying the creation verb.

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 its siblings (e.g., update, delete, get). No prerequisites or alternative scenarios are mentioned, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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