Create Basecamp Todo List Group

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: the default placement is the bottom, and placement behavior is conditional on the placement argument. It does not mention auth requirements or return format, but adds real value.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core creation action, then workflow routing. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or restatement of the name.

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 4-param mutation tool with no output schema and annotations already covering safety, the description covers creation, default placement, and the follow-on workflow. The one minor gap is that it never states that the new group's ID is returned, which the agent needs to chain the suggested follow-up calls.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds interpretation beyond the schema: it clarifies that the group ID returned is later passed as todolist_id to other tools, and explains the default bottom placement and the before/after dependency on relative_to_id. This is meaningful semantic framing not present in the schema.

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 and resource ('Create a group (section) in a todo list') and immediately clarifies the intent ('to split its todos'). This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like basecamp_create_todolist and basecamp_create_todo.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: add todos via basecamp_create_todo (passing the group ID as todolist_id), move todos via basecamp_move_todo (destination_id), and rename/describe via basecamp_update_todolist. Both when-to-use and which-alternative are named, leaving nothing to inference.

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