Retrieve one Datto EDR target group by GUID to inspect its details and support agent, alert, or policy investigations.
Get one target group by id (GET /api/targets/{id}).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Object id (GUID) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the underlying GET endpoint, but does not disclose error behavior such as missing-id/404 handling or what a returned target group contains.
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?
A single sentence with the key scope and endpoint front-loaded. There is no wasted text.
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 read-only lookup with one fully documented parameter and annotations covering the safety profile, the definition is essentially complete. The only minor gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not describe the returned target-group shape.
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 already documents the single required 'id' parameter as a GUID. The description only reinforces that retrieval is by id and adds no syntax or formatting detail 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?
States a specific verb and resource: get one target group by id. The word 'one' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling datto_edr_target_groups_list, though it does not name that sibling explicitly.
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?
Usage is implied by 'by id' – a caller should use this when they have a specific target-group GUID. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer the list sibling or what to do if the id is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.