set_group_leave

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states a mutation ('leave/dismiss') without covering reversibility, permissions, side effects, or what happens to the group or member. This is a significant gap for a state-changing 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?

Five words, front-loaded with the action, and no filler or repetition. Every word carries meaning, making this an example of efficient writing.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify key operational details: what 'dismiss' means, whether is_dismiss is required for each behavior, and what the outcome is. The description is too sparse to be complete for an agent to correctly choose and invoke the 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?

The schema covers both parameters with descriptions (group_id: 'Group ID', is_dismiss: 'Whether to dismiss group'), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The tool description adds little beyond mapping the top-level action to the is_dismiss flag, and does not clarify default behavior when is_dismiss is omitted.

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 uses a specific verb ('leave/dismiss') and resource ('group'), distinguishing it from sibling actions like set_group_kick or set_group_ban. However, 'dismiss' is ambiguous—it does not clarify whether it means disbanding the group or removing oneself from it—so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no indication of the difference between 'leave' and 'dismiss'. The description leaves the agent to guess from the parameter names which action applies in a given context.

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