group_therapy_round

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

Annotations are all false, so the description bears the burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'shared state, cohesion, and next actions', implying state modification, but does not detail side effects on sessions or system state. The phrase 'Free' is unclear but not contradictory.

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 short (two sentences) but the second sentence 'Free.' is cryptic and adds little value. It could be more informative in the same space, but is not overly verbose.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description partially compensates by mentioning return values. However, it lacks context on prerequisites (e.g., session existence), error conditions, or parameter interplay. Adequate but not complete.

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. However, the description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond the schema. It includes 'Free' which is not a parameter, and does not explain how parameters like ritual_strip or response_mode affect behavior.

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 verb 'Run' and resource 'coordinated group round across multiple sessions', and mentions the return values. It distinguishes from similar tools like group_session_create (which creates a session) and get_group_therapy_status (which queries status). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings, leaving some ambiguity.

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 prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states what it does without context for appropriate usage scenarios.

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