pmg_who_group_create

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It states mutation level (LOW), dry-run behavior, confirm parameter effect, and return format on execution. It does not cover permissions or error handling, but for a low mutation tool this is sufficient.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded purpose and mutation level. No filler; each sentence adds distinct value (purpose, dry-run, next steps, prerequisites, execution result).

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 an output schema, the description covers creation behavior, dry-run pattern, and follow-up actions. It could mention idempotency or duplicate name handling, but overall complete for its 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with individual parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal extra beyond schema (e.g., dry-run behavior tied to confirm, but schema already describes confirm default). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it creates a PMG RuleDB 'who' object group (specific verb+resource) and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning pmg_who_object_add for adding objects and pmg_who_groups_list for listing groups.

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 explicitly explains the dry-run default and confirm=True for execution, and mentions prerequisite config (PROXIMO_PMG_*). It implies when to use (create group) vs alternatives (add objects or list groups). No explicit when-not, but adequate for context.

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