Get A Single Group

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only — it changes nothing in Procore.' It goes beyond annotations by documenting return type (single JSON object) and error scenarios (401/403/404), which helps the agent anticipate failures.

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 dense but each sentence contributes useful information (purpose, usage, default, return, errors, endpoint). It includes some redundancy with schema ('Required parameters'), but overall remains efficient.

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 tool with no output schema, it covers the purpose, parameter semantics, return shape, errors, and even the exact endpoint. This is more than sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about company_id defaulting to procore_set_config and group_id requiring resolution, but the default statement conflicts with the schema's required flag for company_id, which is a minor inconsistency.

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 opens with a clear verb-object ('Get the single Group') and explicitly scopes it to a resource identified by ID, distinguishing it from list/search siblings. The phrase 'when you already know which group you want and need its full field set' further differentiates it from list 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?

It provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when you already know which group you want') and a prerequisite ('resolve it with the matching list tool first'). It does not name a specific alternative tool, but the context makes the intended use clear.

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