pennylane_get_category_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 'retrieve detail' – no note on auth, on what a category group contains, or on behavior when the id doesn't exist.

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?

One short sentence with the verb, resource and lookup key front-loaded; there is no filler to remove.

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 an output schema present, return-value detail is unnecessary, and one parameter is fully documented. However, for a get-by-id tool sitting among list_category_groups and get_category, the description does nothing to disambiguate the resource, leaving a small gap.

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 100% and there is a single required id parameter already documented as 'Identifiant du groupe de catégories.' The description's 'par son identifiant' merely restates it, so the baseline of 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 ('Récupère') and resource ('le détail d'un groupe de catégories') scoped by identifier, so an agent can distinguish it from pennylane_list_category_groups. It does not name the sibling explicitly, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 phrase 'par son identifiant' implies the id must come from a prior list call, but no tool is named and there is no when/when-not guidance. The agent must infer that this is the detail-fetch counterpart to pennylane_list_category_groups.

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