get_property_group_directory_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that IDs must be numeric strings, which is a behavioral constraint. However, it does not mention read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior for invalid IDs. With no annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate – adds some value but lacks full transparency.

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?

Two sentences with a clear lead sentence stating purpose, followed by a critical usage note. Every sentence adds value; no wasted words. The warning is appropriately emphasized with 'IMPORTANT'.

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 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and how to use IDs. It hints at the output (properties organized by groups/portfolios). For a report tool, this is sufficient; missing explicit return format but not critical.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates the ID format requirement already in the schema descriptions ('numeric strings, NOT names'). It adds guidance to use directory reports to lookup IDs, but that is usage context rather than parameter semantics. No additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Get property group directory report from AppFolio. Shows properties organized by property groups and portfolios.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('property group directory report'). The mention of organization by groups and portfolios distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_property_directory_report and get_owner_directory_report.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'IMPORTANT: All ID parameters ... must be numeric strings ... NOT names. Use respective directory reports first to lookup IDs by name if needed.' This tells the agent when to use this tool (after looking up IDs) and gives clear alternatives (other directory reports).

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