sonchat_create_invite

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the admin key requirement, which is useful, but does not specify side effects (e.g., that it creates a persistent invite), return value, or whether it can revoke existing invites. The description is largely an action statement.

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 a single sentence with two clauses, front-loaded with the action and followed by the auth requirement. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple with only 3 parameters and a comprehensive schema, but the description omits the return value (the invite token/link) and any relationship to sibling tools (e.g., that the invite appears in sonchat_invites). Given no annotations and no output schema, this is a notable gap, but the core function is clear.

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%, with each parameter (label, max_uses, expires_in_days) described including defaults and optionality. The description itself adds no parameter semantics, but the schema already covers them, so this is at baseline.

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 uses a specific verb 'Create' and names the resource 'SonChat invite token/link', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like sonchat_invites (listing) and sonchat_revoke_invite (revocation). It also includes a required auth note, adding context.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The auth requirement hints at appropriate conditions, but there are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements, and no mention of sibling tools like sonchat_revoke_invite.

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