Create invite

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

Annotations only mark the tool as non-readOnly and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context: defaults are deliberate, invites expire in 24 hours, are unlimited by default, and max_age_seconds 0 is required for never-expiring invites. It doesn't cover permissions or return format, but it provides meaningful detail beyond 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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second highlights the key defaults and parameter behavior, so every sentence 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?

For a simple creation tool with a fully described schema, this description is sufficient: it tells the agent what the tool produces (an invite link) and the important defaults. It doesn't specify the exact response payload, but no output schema exists and the purpose clearly implies the returned resource.

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 already documents all 5 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by emphasizing the deliberate defaults and explicitly instructing that max_age_seconds 0 is needed for never-expiring invites, which clarifies intent 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 uses the specific verb 'Create' and resource 'invite link for a channel', immediately establishing what the tool does. It also states key defaults, distinguishing it from sibling invite tools like list_invites, get_invite, and delete_invite.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool — to create an invite link for a channel — and explains the deliberate default lifetime and use limits, including how to request a never-expiring invite. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but no true alternative creation tool exists.

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