Get a user group by id (Enterprise Manager level)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the response content ('one EM-level user group with its roles and member preview') but does not mention permissions, error behavior, whether archived groups are included, or rate limits.

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 extremely short and free of fluff, but it is a fragment rather than a complete sentence. It conveys key information but lacks a verb and structured phrasing, making it slightly awkward.

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 many siblings, the description is too sparse. It does not clarify when to use EM-level vs non-EM, whether the group is active or archived, or what happens for missing IDs. The output schema exists but the description does not adequately complement it.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not explain the group_id parameter format or provenance. The title's 'by id' and the parameter name provide some obvious meaning, but the description adds no value beyond that.

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 identifies the specific resource as 'EM-level user group' and notes it includes 'roles and member preview', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_user_group. However, it uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb, relying on the title for the action.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_user_group or list_em_user_groups. The description does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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