lokalise_get_usergroup

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

With no annotations, the description shoulders full transparency. It states the return includes 'admin rights, language permissions, and assigned projects/members' and implies read-only behavior. Does not explicitly state no side effects, but the verb 'gets' is strong enough.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by required params, use cases, and return details. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple retrieval tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and return details. Could mention error handling, but not critical. Slightly above adequate.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. Description adds 'Required: teamId, groupId' but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. 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 action 'Gets detailed information' and the resource 'user group'. It lists specific details included (members, permissions, project assignments), distinguishing it from sibling CRUD tools.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: 'Use to audit group configuration, verify member access, or understand permission structure.' Also notes required parameters. Does not mention when to avoid or list alternatives, but context is clear.

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