Invite Agent to Chat

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses significant behavioral traits: lazy creation of a per-App BotInstance, live XMPP client spawn, and no ai-service restart requirement. It also clarifies that multiple agents can coexist, which is important for expected state changes.

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 multi-sentence but each sentence contributes value: core action, multi-agent behavior, side effects, recipe pointer, and prerequisites. It front-loads the primary action and is not wasteful, though it is slightly longer than the minimum needed.

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 prerequisites, side effects, usage pattern, and points to a recipe for complex scenarios. It does not explain return values (no output schema) or error handling, but these are not essential for a tool with clear side effects. The description is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.

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% with detailed descriptions for each parameter, including preferred chatJid and alias agentId. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the prerequisites (agent and room), so it does not elevate the baseline of 3 set by high schema coverage.

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 states a specific action — 'Invite an Agent into a chat room' — with clear resource and verb, and elaborates on multi-agent coexistence and side effects (lazy BotInstance creation, XMPP spawn). It distinguishes itself from creation tools by explicitly requiring an existing agent and room, which positions it as an invitation step rather than a creation step.

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?

Provides explicit prerequisites ('Requires: an agent ... and a room') and usage pattern ('call this tool once per agent'), making it clear when to use. It does not name specific alternative tools, but the context implies this is the invitation action distinct from agent creation or chat creation, and points to a recipe for multi-agent setups.

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