create_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that it creates a group for visual organization, which implies a non-destructive write operation, but it does not disclose whether this affects the schema version, requires permissions, is reversible, or what happens to associated tables. Essential side-effect information is absent.

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 clear sentence followed by a structured list of parameter explanations. It is not verbose, but the full list repeats parameter names already present in the schema. Still, the explanations make the list valuable. The main statement is front-loaded and direct.

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 the tool has 10 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the purpose and parameter meanings sufficiently. The only missing contextual element is usage guidance (when to use vs. alternatives). For a straightforward create operation, this is near complete, but not fully.

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 provides only bare titles, while the description adds a meaningful one-line explanation for every parameter (e.g., schema_uuid: 'UUID схемы', position_x: 'Координата X группы на холсте'). This significantly enriches schema understanding and correctly covers all 10 parameters.

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 'Создать группу таблиц в схеме (для визуальной организации)' — 'Create a group of tables in the schema (for visual organization).' This uses a specific verb and resource, and 'для визуальной организации' explains the purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like edit_group and delete_group by indicating it is a creation action.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that editing groups should use edit_group or deleting should use delete_group, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The description merely lists parameters and provides no contextual usage direction.

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