clickup_group_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a creation operation (implies mutation), mentions the return value ('Returns the created group object including its new id'), and states a constraint ('At least one initial member is required'). However, it lacks details on permissions needed, error conditions, or rate limits that would be helpful for a mutation tool.

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 efficiently structured in three sentences: purpose, usage context/constraint, and return value. Each sentence adds essential information with zero waste, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with the core action.

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 complexity (mutation with 3 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description does a good job covering the basics: purpose, constraint, and return. However, it could be more complete by addressing permissions, error handling, or linking to sibling tools for related operations, which would help an agent navigate the ecosystem better.

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 schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying the 'member_ids' parameter is for 'initial members' and mentioning the return includes a 'new id', but does not provide additional syntax, format, or semantic context not already in the schema descriptions.

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 specific action ('Create a new user group'), identifies the resource ('group'/'team' in ClickUp's UI), and explains the purpose ('Groups let you @-mention or assign multiple users as a unit'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like clickup_group_list (list) and clickup_group_update (update).

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 ('Create a new user group... in a workspace') and mentions a prerequisite ('At least one initial member is required'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives among the many sibling tools (e.g., no comparison to clickup_group_update for modifications).

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