redmine_group_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral aspects. It does not mention authentication requirements, possible errors (e.g., 404 for missing group), or whether the response includes members or other details. The description is purely a functional statement without behavioral context.

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 very short and front-loaded with the action, but it is overly terse, omitting even a hint about the parameter or usage. While concise, it sacrifices useful context; a single sentence that only repeats the name and endpoint is borderline under-specification rather than effective brevity.

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 GET by ID, the description is minimally adequate but lacks key context such as when to use it, what it returns, and how it relates to listing groups. Given the large sibling set, the absence of any routing guidance reduces completeness.

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 only parameter, id, is documented in the schema but the description adds no additional meaning. It does not clarify that id refers to the group's numeric identifier or that it must be a positive integer (already in schema). With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 clearly states the action 'Get group' and provides the exact HTTP endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling list operations like redmine_groups_list and other group-related tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that redmine_groups_list should be used to enumerate groups before fetching by ID, nor does it specify any prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the verb and endpoint.

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