pve_group_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses that the tool is a mutation, additive and low risk, synchronous with no UPID, and that the group is inert until users or ACL are added. This gives the agent a complete picture of the tool's behavior.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence provides essential information. No unnecessary words.

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 the tool's simplicity (4 parameters, output schema present), the description covers the purpose, behavior, risk, return type, synchronous execution, and post-creation steps. It is fully complete for an agent to understand and use the tool 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the schema. It mentions 'confirm=True' but does not explain its effect beyond what schema says (dry-run vs execute).

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 'create an (empty) group' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pve_group_update or pve_group_delete by specifying that the group is initially empty and inert until further actions.

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 explains the dry-run default and confirm=True for execution, and explicitly mentions subsequent actions (pve_user_update/pve_user_create, pve_acl_modify) to make the group functional. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the context of creating an empty group is clear.

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