set_group_leave

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose two useful traits: the call mutates group state, and the exit is not trivially free because the bot must rejoin afterwards. It omits permission requirements, what happens if the bot is the sole owner, and whether the call succeeds silently — real gaps for an unannotated mutation.

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 short sentences with the action front-loaded and the consequence immediately after. '会改变群的状态' is mildly redundant for a set_* mutation tool, keeping it from a full 5, but nothing is padded or repetitive.

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?

For a flat single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: what it does, that it mutates state, and that the change is costly to reverse. Missing permission/edge-case behavior (e.g. owner leaving) is a minor gap given the tool's low complexity.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema description coverage is 100% — the schema already says group_id is the target and instructs the agent to source it from get_group_list rather than memory. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 for high schema coverage is correct.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: '退出指定群' (leave the specified group), which is immediately distinguishable from the mutating siblings like set_group_kick (removing someone else) or set_group_ban. It is clear but does not explicitly name an alternative for contrast, so it stops just short of 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the verb itself — an agent infers this is the tool to call when the bot should leave a group. There is no statement of when NOT to use it, no prerequisites (e.g. membership/owner status), and no routing to a sibling such as set_group_kick. The '退了得重新加' clause hints at consequence but is not actionable guidance.

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