update_org_group

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

No annotations provided, and the description only states 'Update a group', which implies mutation but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or reversibility. Minimal transparency beyond the action.

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 very concise (4 words), which is efficient, but it sacrifices informativeness. A slightly more detailed summary would justify a higher score. Structure is front-loaded but lacks substance.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 4 parameters including a nested array, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the scope of updates (e.g., group settings vs. members) or the impact of modifying collections. Inadequate for a mutation tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents parameters. The description itself adds no additional meaning about parameter relationships, constraints, or usage beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description 'Update a group' is a verb+resource, indicating the action and object. However, it is very generic and does not distinguish from siblings like update_org_group_members or other update tools. The purpose is clear but lacks specificity.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not contrast with update_org_group_members (which handles member changes) or create_org_group. No context provided.

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