Create Group And Move Markups

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

The description discloses that the tool creates a group in the same layer as the source group and moves specified markups, and returns the created object on success (HTTP 201). Annotations already indicate it is not read-only, so the description adds value by detailing the side effect of moving markups and the success response.

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 moderately concise but suffers from repetition ('Creates a new Document Markup records' appears twice). It could be streamlined without losing information. The essential information is present, but the redundancy reduces clarity and efficiency.

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 no output schema, the description covers the basic action and return type but leaves gaps. It implies markup_ids are required for moving markups, yet they are optional in the schema. It does not explain the behavior when markup_ids are absent, the naming of the new group, or parameters like 'action' and 'escalate_to_pin'. The completeness is inadequate for a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining that the new group is created in the same layer as the source_group_id, and lists required parameters explicitly. This goes beyond the schema's field descriptions by clarifying the relationship between source_group_id and the new group.

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 it creates a new group in the same layer as a source group and moves markups to it. The verb 'create' and resource 'group' are specific. However, it contains some confusion by mentioning 'create a new Document Markup records' which is not exactly accurate, detracting from perfect clarity.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_a_new_group' or 'modify_markups'. It does not indicate when not to use it or provide context for selecting this tool over siblings. The only hint is that it involves moving markups, but no explicit differentiation.

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