Leave Group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the action is permanent, which is a key behavioral side effect. It does not mention irreversibility in terms of re-joining later, but the 'permanently' is sufficient for this simple action.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the key side effect. No extraneous information.

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?

Given the simple single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the action and its permanent effect. It does not explain return values, but none are expected for a void operation like leaving a group.

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% (groupId is described as 'LINE Group ID (starts with "C")'). The description does not add additional meaning beyond that, but since the schema already explains the parameter fully, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'leave' on a specific resource 'LINE group chat', and distinguishes it from the sibling 'leave_room' by explicitly mentioning 'group'. No ambiguity.

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?

It is evident this tool is for making the bot exit a group, and the permanent nature is stated. However, it does not explicitly contrast with leave_room (which serves rooms) or mention when not to use it, but the group/room distinction is implicit.

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