vela_create_trigger

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, consistent with a write operation. The description adds value by specifying the return of a token and supported payload types, but does not disclose permissions, idempotency (idempotentHint=false), or side effects beyond creation.

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 concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the mission-critical information: creation of a webhook trigger and key parameter options. Every word earns its place.

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 presence of a detailed input schema and an output schema (though not shown), the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and key options. It lacks details about return value structure or error conditions, but the context provided by schemas compensates. The description is slightly incomplete regarding the relationship between registry and component_name.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all properties (high coverage), so the description's mention of payload_type support adds minimal extra meaning. It reiterates the schema's pattern but does not clarify relationships between parameters like component_name and workflow_name.

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 webhook trigger for an application, listing supported payload types and mentioning token return. It provides the corresponding API endpoint, making the purpose specific and actionable. While it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, the verb 'create' contrasts with list/read tools like vela_list_triggers.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention preconditions or when not to use it. Sibling tools include other creation tools like vela_create_application, but no distinctions are made.

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