退出群聊

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

The description adds an explicit warning that the action is irreversible and advises confirmation before calling, which goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation. It also specifies the bot is the actor ('让机器人主动退出'). 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence with no redundancy, front-loading the purpose and including a critical warning. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 description covers the core action and its irreversibility, but does not explain the optional is_dismiss parameter or any side effects beyond leaving. Given the schema covers parameters and annotations cover destructiveness, it is mostly complete, though it could mention that the bot will no longer be in the group.

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 schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (group_id and is_dismiss) with 100% coverage. The description does not add any additional meaning or examples, so it adds no value 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 states a specific verb '主动退出' (actively leave) and resource '指定群' (specified group), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_group_kick which target other members. The title also clarifies it's about leaving the group chat.

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 implies usage context (when the bot should leave a group) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_group_kick or when not to use it. There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions.

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