sw_create_group

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation destructiveHint=true. Critically, it omits the confirmation workflow (the 'confirm' parameter must be true, otherwise a preview is returned) and any details about side effects. The annotation suggests destructive potential, but the description does not explain why or how.

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 extremely brief, consisting of a single sentence with no extra details. While it is not verbose, it is under-specified, omitting important information about the confirmation requirement and parameter behavior. It is concise but not adequately informative.

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 4 parameters, includes a confirmation/preview mechanism, and lacks an output schema, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the preview flow, the group_type options, or the implications of simplify_by_default. The schema covers some of this, but the description itself provides minimal context for an agent deciding to invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning or context for the parameters, but the schema is sufficient. 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 action ('Create') and the resource ('a new Splitwise group'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like sw_get_group or sw_delete_group, though the verb itself provides sufficient distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. There is no context about when someone would choose to create a group versus simply retrieving or updating an existing one.

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