Get a group

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description need not repeat those. It adds the membership constraint ('you belong to'), which is beyond the annotations and useful for access control expectations. No contradictions with the readOnlyHint.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose and a key constraint (membership). No unnecessary words or redundancy; it is optimally front-loaded.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with comprehensive annotations and a single required parameter, the description covers the essential information: what it does and the scope (groups you belong to). With no output schema needed and straightforward behavior, nothing critical is missing.

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% with the groupId parameter described as 'Canvas numeric id.' The description adds no additional parameter detail beyond the schema, which is adequate given the high coverage. A baseline of 3 is appropriate since no extra guidance is needed.

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 tool returns details for a single group, using the possessive 'you belong to' to imply membership scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings like canvas_list_my_groups (list) and canvas_list_group_members (members) by specifying 'one group' and 'you belong to.' The verb is implicit but reinforced by the title 'Get a group'.

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 phrase 'one group you belong to' gives clear context that this is for retrieving a single group's details, differentiating from list operations. However, it does not explicitly name alternate tools or conditions for when not to use this tool, though the implication is clear.

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