get_group

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

The verb 'show' implies a read-only operation, and the description states what is returned (members and projects). However, with no annotations provided, it does not disclose potential errors, authentication requirements, or side effects, leaving a gap in transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and includes a simple args list. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 read tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description is largely adequate. It could benefit from usage examples or error conditions, but the core action and result are clear.

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 description restates 'group_id: group ID' which adds no meaning beyond the schema's title 'Group Id.' With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate by explaining what a group ID references or how to obtain it.

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 tool's function: 'Show a group's details: its members and the projects it belongs to.' It uses a specific verb ('show') and resource ('group') and differentiates from sibling tools like list_groups by specifying the returned details.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_groups or get_user. The description does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or context for when this tool is preferred.

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