collaboration_admin_invoke

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

With no annotations, description partially carries the burden. It states the tool is rarely-used, dispatches by action, and requires confirmed=true for writes. Lacks details on error handling, side effects, or return 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?

Two concise sentences and a list, front-loaded with key info. Every sentence earns its place; no wasted words.

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?

Covers action list and confirmed flag, but lacks description of return values (which vary by action) and error handling. Given the complexity (15 actions), more contextual info would improve completeness.

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 low (33%), but description adds value by explaining the confirmed parameter's role and listing all actions with their parameter details in the schema description. This goes beyond the bare enum and properties.

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?

Description clearly states it is a meta-tool for rarely-used admin collaboration operations, listing 15 specific actions. It distinguishes from sibling tools by being a collapsed meta-tool for admin ops, though some overlap exists.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternative sibling tools (e.g., team_create vs. collaboration_team). Only mentions that write actions require confirmed=true, but does not provide context for decision-making.

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