alterios_get_user_group

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It indicates a read operation via typed security route but omits details like permissions required, performance, or what happens if the ID doesn't exist. No return value description despite an output schema existing.

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 short sentence, front-loading the core purpose. It wastes no words but may be too brief. However, it earns a 4 for being succinct and to the point.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema, the description lacks completeness: no explanation of what a user group is, how to obtain an ID, or any context about the typed security route. For a tool with 3 parameters and no annotations, this is insufficient for an agent to use it correctly without additional knowledge.

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%, meaning parameters are undocumented in the schema. The tool description does not explain any of the three parameters (profile, project_id, user_group_id), leaving the agent without guidance on how to construct arguments.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource 'Alterios user group by ID', distinguishing it from sibling 'alterios_list_user_groups' which lists groups. The addition of 'through the typed security route' provides a specific context, though slightly jargon-ish, the core action is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., alterios_list_user_groups). No mention of prerequisites or typical scenarios. The description does not help an agent decide to use this over other tools.

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