postmd_create_group

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the auth requirement (groups:write) and hints at downstream capabilities, but it does not describe the response, side effects, uniqueness rules, or error behavior for a mutation operation.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the auth prerequisite and a brief explanation of the group's purpose. Every sentence earns its place.

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 description is adequate for a simple create operation: it states the purpose and auth requirement, and the schema covers the optional expireDate. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it omits what the client receives on success and any error or validation behavior.

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 description adds no parameter-level meaning. The schema covers only expireDate; the required name parameter has no schema description and the tool description does not compensate by explaining it. The name is somewhat obvious, but overall the description does not enrich the parameter semantics.

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 states the action and resource precisely: 'Create a group.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that create documents or update/delete groups, and there is no ambiguity about what the operation does.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: it is for creating a group that will later hold documents and have members invited through the web app. It also names the required API key permission, though it does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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