Create client group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Create' (a mutation) but does not disclose auth requirements, side effects, or whether the operation is reversible. The only behavioral clue is that members must be existing, which 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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The verb and resource are front-loaded. Every phrase earns its place, clearly stating the action and a key constraint about members.

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?

Despite having 9 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description does not mention return values or typical behavior. The agent lacks guidance on what to expect after creation. Annotations are absent, so the description should compensate but falls short.

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?

With 67% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying that members must be existing contacts/organizations, but does not explain all 9 parameters (e.g., ClientManager lacks description). Overall, marginal improvement over 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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'client group' in Karbon. It specifies that members are existing contacts and/or organizations, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_contact or create_organization.

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 the tool is for creating groups but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., when to use create_client_group vs create_contact). It mentions members are existing, hinting at prerequisites, but no clear guidance on when not to use this tool.

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