send_group_notice

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

The description contradicts the idempotentHint annotation (true) by warning that excessive notices may be rate-limited, implying non-idempotent behavior. Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), but the description adds useful admin privilege requirement and rate limit warning; nevertheless, the contradiction mandates a score of 1.

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 concise (5 lines) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, parameters, requirements, caveats, and sibling differentiation. No wasted 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 no output schema, the description covers prerequisites (admin privileges), behavior (persistent, visible to all), side effects (mutates group), and a caveat (rate limiting). It lacks return value or error details, but overall is sufficient for a mutation 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining group_id as 'the QQ group number' and content as 'announcement text (plain text only)'. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though format details are minimal.

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 tool sends a group announcement to a QQ group, using specific verbs ('send') and resources ('group announcement'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool send_message by noting persistence and visibility to later joiners.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (persistent notices) and contrasts it with send_message. It warns about rate limiting and suggests not posting too frequently, but does not explicitly list when not to use it or other alternatives.

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