kaiten_get_company_group

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the operation. It does not mention whether the response includes member lists, whether invalid UIDs return null or an error, or any permission requirements.

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 concise sentence with no filler, and the key identifier detail 'by UID' is front-loaded. It is appropriately short for a simple get operation, though it sacrifices behavioral context.

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 one-parameter get operation, the description is minimally adequate: it names the resource and the required identifier. However, with no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context about what is returned or how to handle missing groups would make it 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?

The single parameter group_uid is fully described in the schema with 'Group UID', and the description merely echoes the lookup-by-UID semantics. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies; the description adds no meaningful parameter information beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a company group by UID.' It clearly identifies this as a single-item retrieval operation, distinguishing it from kaiten_list_company_groups, kaiten_create_company_group, and kaiten_delete_company_group without needing to name them.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need a specific company group identified by UID. However, it provides no explicit guidance about alternatives, when not to use it, or how it relates to list_company_groups or other company-group operations.

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