send_group_invite

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

No annotations provided, and the description is minimal. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what happens to the invited numbers. The description relies entirely on the tool name.

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, which is concise. However, it is so brief that it omits important context that could be included without verbosity.

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 no output schema and four required parameters, the description fails to provide context about the return value (e.g., success confirmation) or any prerequisites like needing to have created the group first. The description is incomplete for an agent to confidently use the tool.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it simply paraphrases the purpose. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since schema already explains parameters.

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 action 'Send a group invite' to 'one or more numbers'. It identifies the primary verb and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'fetch_invite_code' or 'accept_invite_code', which also relate to group invites.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as creating a group or handling invite codes. Lacks context on prerequisites like having an active instance or group ownership.

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