Initiate a new ChatGPT chat session to submit prompts directly from your MCP-compatible assistant.
Start a new chat conversation in ChatGPT.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "new_chatgpt_chat_tool"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects like whether it creates a persistent conversation, destroys prior context, or requires authentication.
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded, no extra words. Perfectly concise for a simple tool.
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 tool with no inputs and no output schema, but it fails to mention important details like whether the tool returns a conversation identifier or automatically activates the new chat, which would be helpful for an agent.
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?
Input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable as none exist.
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 'Start a new chat conversation in ChatGPT' clearly states the verb 'start' and resource 'chat conversation', and it distinguishes from siblings like 'ask_chatgpt_tool' which likely sends messages within an existing 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 initiating a conversation, and the context of siblings suggests it is the first step before using ask_chatgpt_tool, but no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.