create_chat

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false, indicating non-destructive. The description adds that it returns the reply text and chat ID, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as cost, rate limits, or whether it modifies any state beyond creation. With annotations covering safety, the description provides marginal added 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action and return value with no wasted words. It is highly concise and structured effectively.

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 tool with 7 parameters and no output schema, the description provides minimal information about the return format (e.g., structure of reply text and chat ID, what 'when available' means). While the high schema coverage partially compensates, the description lacks details on how parameters like context, thinkingLevel, or externalChannelId affect behavior. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 100%; all parameters have descriptive schema entries. The tool description adds no additional parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Start' and the resource 'new chat', and specifies what is returned (reply text and chat ID). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like post_chat_message (for continuing existing chats) by emphasizing 'new chat'.

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 implies usage for starting new chats but does not explicitly state when to use alternatives or provide context on prerequisites. No mention of when not to use this tool or comparisons with siblings like list_chats or post_chat_message.

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