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

Annotations already set destructiveHint: true, so the description is not required to repeat that. It adds a technical detail (GraphQL) but no additional context about side effects, permissions, or irreversibility.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the main action and include a helpful technical reference. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, a brief note on return value or confirmation would improve completeness. However, for a single-param action, it is 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 coverage is 100% with a clear description of the 'id' parameter. The tool description does not add any further explanation beyond what is in 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 'CLOSES a conversation (marks it resolved)' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'groove_open_conversation'.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The purpose is implied but no direct comparison with siblings like 'groove_assign_conversation' or 'groove_snooze_conversation'.

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