contacts_group_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the action without details on idempotency, authorization needs, side effects (e.g., overwrite existing), or rate limits.

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 a single sentence with the API method in parentheses, which is efficient and front-loaded. No unnecessary words, but lacks some helpful structure (e.g., a separate usage note).

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 simple create tool with one well-documented parameter, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain return values or error conditions, which would help in context-rich usage.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'name' parameter with a clear description. The description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for this dimension.

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 verb 'create' and resource 'contact group', and includes the API method 'contactGroups.create'. This differentiates from sibling tools like contacts_group_update and contacts_group_delete.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where another tool (e.g., contacts_group_update) would be more appropriate.

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