Leave a cluster group

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

Annotations only give a generic mutation profile (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false). The description adds a genuinely non-obvious side effect: the user is moved into a brand-new cluster group of their own, not merely removed. It stops short of saying what happens to the previous group's members or what permissions are required.

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?

Core effect is front-loaded in the first sentence, with the HTTP operation/tag line kept to a compact trailing note. Nothing redundant, though the API-tag line is marginal value for an agent.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the primary side effect but leaves open what happens to the vacated group and whether the caller needs to be a member. Annotations cover basic safety, so this is adequate-but-gapped.

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?

One required 'id' parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about the id (e.g. that it identifies the group being left), so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Leave a cluster group') and adds the concrete effect ('Move the current user into a new cluster group of their own'). It is distinguishable from the cluster-group siblings like create_cluster_group_request and accept_cluster_group_request, though it never names them directly.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of the related request/accept flow or any alternative path. The agent must infer that this is the self-service exit action from the effect sentence alone.

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