yuque_create_group

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only restates the action without disclosing side effects, permission requirements, error handling, or response format. The mutation nature is implied but not elaborated, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 single-sentence description is brief and word-efficient, but it essentially restates the tool name without adding new information. It is under-specified rather than elegantly concise, so it doesn't fully earn 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?

This is a mutation tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description does not explain what the created group entity entails, whether login is a unique identifier, or what the response will look like, making it insufficient for safe use.

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 0%, and the description gives no explanation of the parameters (name, login, description). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value beyond the bare schema, failing to compensate for the lack of documentation.

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 action (create) and the resource (a new Yuque group), which is unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling group tools like update or delete, but the verb 'create' inherently differentiates it, earning a score just below the top.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as yuque_list_groups, yuque_update_group, or yuque_delete_group. There are no prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions mentioned.

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