Add contact group

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

The description adds only the note that fields go inside the 'params' object, which is also evident from the schema. Annotations indicate this is a write operation, but the description doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits such as required fields, response format, or side effects beyond the basic add operation.

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 very concise, comprising two short sentences. The first sentence communicates the purpose, while the second reiterates the parameter structure already evident from the schema. It is not overly verbose, but the second sentence adds little 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?

Given the lack of an output schema and the openWorldHint allowing arbitrary fields, the description does not explain what the tool returns, what fields are commonly used, or any constraints. This leaves significant gaps for an agent trying to invoke it effectively.

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 has a single 'params' object parameter with high schema coverage (100%). The description reinforces that fields go inside params but adds no detailed information about the fields themselves. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool adds a contact group, using the verb 'add' and the resource 'contact group'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_contact and add_source. However, it doesn't elaborate on what a contact group is or any specific scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, related tools, or scenarios. The description simply states the action without any contextual direction.

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