Get Group

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only.' merely restates structured data and earns no credit. Nothing is added about access constraints (e.g., what happens if the caller isn't a member of the group) or about response shape beyond the field list.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, then the safety fact, then the ID source. No filler, and every clause is actionable.

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?

With only one parameter, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden itself and does so by naming the fields returned. An agent can call this correctly and know what to expect from the result without further documentation.

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% and the schema's own group_id description already says 'Student group ID (numeric string). Get it from list_my_groups.' The description's provenance hint duplicates that verbatim, adding no syntax, format, or validation meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one student group') and enumerates exactly what comes back: name, description, member count, owning course. The singular 'one' plus the explicit routing to list_my_groups makes it distinguishable from the many list_* siblings without opening a schema.

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?

'Get group_id from list_my_groups' gives the concrete prerequisite and points at the sibling that produces the identifier, which is the main usage question for a single-item getter. It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or failing behavior for an ID the user can't see.

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