create_allocation

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

Annotations provide openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=true, indicating this is a write operation that modifies state. The description adds valuable context: it specifies this is an 'admin action' and requires specific authentication ('Application API key'), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the action, providing usage examples, and outlining prerequisites. No wasted words, and key information is front-loaded.

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 destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and prerequisites well. It could be more complete by hinting at potential side effects or confirmation steps, but given the annotations and clear parameters, it's largely adequate.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal extra semantics by giving examples of port formats ('25565' or '25565-25570') and hinting at node_id sourcing from list_nodes, but doesn't significantly enhance understanding beyond the 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 clearly states the action ('Create new port allocations'), specifies the resource ('on a node'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_allocations' (read) and 'delete_allocation' (remove). It provides specific details about what can be allocated (individual ports or ranges).

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 prerequisites: 'Use list_nodes to find the node_id first' and 'Requires Application API key.' It also distinguishes when to use this tool versus alternatives by mentioning the need to first use list_nodes, and the admin-only nature implies it's not for general users.

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