Get group

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of permissions required, what a group object contains, or behavior when the group or org is missing.

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 words is not so much concise as under-specified; there is no front-loaded scope or qualifying clause. The brevity leaves the definition with no informational payload.

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 5-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and three untyped optional parameters, the description should explain identifiers and the role of form/params/json_body. None of that is present, so an agent cannot confidently call it.

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 description coverage is 0% and 5 parameters exist, including opaque ones like form, params, and json_body with no type or meaning. The description mentions no parameters at all, so org_id and group_id semantics, formats, or sourcing are entirely undocumented.

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 one group" merely restates the tool name and title, adding only the singular-quantity hint. It does not distinguish the tool from siblings like vaultwarden_get_group_details, vaultwarden_get_groups, or vaultwarden_get_group_members.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of vaultwarden_get_groups (list) or vaultwarden_get_group_details (likely richer detail). The agent must infer the choice from names alone, with no prerequisites or exclusions stated.

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