conversations_invite_shared

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action 'send', implying a write operation, but omits details like required permissions, side effects (e.g., duplicate invites), rate limits, or how the response is structured. The minimal description leaves critical gaps for an AI agent.

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, making it concise. However, this brevity comes at the cost of clarity and missing critical details. It is appropriately sized for a one-line summary but fails to serve as a complete guide.

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 complexity of shared channel invites (multiple parameters, distinction from regular invites), the description is far from complete. Even though an output schema exists, the lack of parameter context and usage guidance leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use this 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage (no parameter descriptions), and the tool description does not explain the purpose or usage of any of the four parameters (channel, emails, external_limited, user_ids). The agent must infer meaning solely from parameter names, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 'Send a shared channel invite' conveys a basic verb+resource, but it lacks specificity about what constitutes a 'shared channel' and how this differs from similar tools like 'conversations_invite' or other shared-invite operations. The name suggests a distinct use case, but the description provides no further differentiation.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'conversations_invite', 'conversations_accept_shared_invite', or 'conversations_external_invite_permissions_set'. Without context on prerequisites or scenarios, an agent cannot reliably choose this tool.

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