Get A Single Group

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the return format (JSON object describing Resource Planning records) and the API endpoint, which aids in understanding the tool's behavior beyond the annotations.

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 concise at four sentences, with key information front-loaded. However, the phrase 'Resource Planning records' is slightly redundant and may cause confusion. Overall, it is well-structured but could be slightly more streamlined.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, strong annotations, and high schema coverage, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and return value. It does not cover the optional pagination parameters (page, per_page), but these are documented in the schema, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description merely restates that company_id and group_id are required, adding minimal new meaning. It does not elaborate on the purpose of 'page' and 'per_page' parameters, though the schema itself covers them.

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 uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('single Group'), clearly indicating the tool fetches a single group by ID. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_all_company_groups' and 'create_a_single_group' by explicitly stating it retrieves full details of a specific Resource Planning record.

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 description says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Resource Planning records by its identifier,' providing basic usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, nor does it mention alternatives such as 'get_group_by_id' or 'list_groups', leaving the selection somewhat ambiguous.

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