create_group

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear full burden. It discloses that no message is sent, chatType affects member addition (invite vs direct), and only one create per call. Does not mention errors, rate limits, or idempotency, but is transparent about core behavior.

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?

Description is concise with four sentences that front-load the main purpose. No redundant information; each sentence adds unique value.

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?

No output schema or annotations, but description covers key behavior. Lacks details on return value (e.g., created group ID), error handling, or prerequisites like login. Adequate for a simple tool but not fully comprehensive.

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 good descriptions. The description adds value by clarifying chatType meaning (group vs room) and noting that mids can come from find_contact, which aids parameter selection.

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?

Clearly states the tool creates a LINE group/room immediately with given members and no message is sent. Distinguishes between chatType 0 and 1, differentiating from sibling tools like list_groups or leave_group.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use guidance: creating a group with initial members. Mentions that mids can come from find_contact and defaults chatType to 1. Does not explicitly state when not to use or give alternatives but implies the context.

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