harvest_get_group

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It adds an important constraint—'requires at least one of url or groupId'—that is not evident from the schema's zero required parameters. However, it does not explain what happens if both are provided, error behavior, or explicitly confirm the operation is read-only.

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 sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes only the essential requirement. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 2-parameter get tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core invocation logic and the key constraint. It does not mention return format or authorization, but these are minor gaps given the simplicity of the operation and the absence of structured annotations.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, but the description adds critical semantic meaning by clarifying that at least one of url or groupId must be supplied. This relationship is not captured in the schema and helps the agent understand parameter dependencies.

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 'Get LinkedIn group' clearly states the action (get) and resource (LinkedIn group), distinguishing it from sibling tools like harvest_get_company or harvest_search_groups. The mention of 'url or groupId' further specifies the scope of what is retrieved.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as harvest_search_groups for finding groups. The description only states a parameter requirement, not contextual usage or conditions for preferring this tool.

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