Creates a new contact group in Holded using a required name, so you can organize contacts for invoicing and communication.
Create a new contact group (Holded API v2)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Contact group name |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations and no output schema, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses only that a creation occurs. It says nothing about required permissions, duplicate-name behavior, idempotency, or what the response contains—significant gaps 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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted clauses. It is appropriately brief, though the API-version parenthetical contributes little for tool selection.
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?
For a create operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves key call-time facts undisclosed: what happens on duplicate names, whether auth scopes matter, and what is returned. A simple schema doesn't fully compensate for those behavioral omissions.
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?
There is one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already defines the meaning of 'name'. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb (Create) and resource (contact group), which implicitly distinguishes it from the list_contact_group, get_contact_group, update_contact_group, and delete_contact_group siblings. The parenthetical API version is noise but doesn't obscure purpose.
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 create a group versus using an existing one, no prerequisites, no mention of duplicate handling, and no explicit alternative named. The agent must infer usage from the verb alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.