yougile_create_group_chat

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive. The description adds a concrete example but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as return value, permissions, or side effects beyond creation.

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: a clear action statement followed by a compact example. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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?

The schema is rich and covers all parameters, and the example fills in practical usage. The only gap is that the 'Requires' list omits title, which is also a required field, but the schema makes this visible and the omission is not likely to mislead.

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?

While the schema describes every parameter (100% coverage), the description enriches understanding by showing an example of how users, userRoleMap, and roleConfigMap interrelate. This example helps clarify the nested structure beyond the schema's property definitions.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a group chat.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like yougile_update_group_chat and yougile_get_group_chat. The subsequent mention of required maps adds scope.

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?

It states that the tool requires users map, userRoleMap, and roleConfigMap, giving the agent a clear prerequisite for use. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the create verb and sibling names make the intended scenario obvious.

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