get_outcome_group

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description does not need to repeat safety. The description's 'Get details' is consistent with readOnlyHint, but no additional behavioral traits (e.g., rate limits, nesting) are disclosed.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the essential purpose efficiently.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple get operation, but with no output schema, it does not describe what 'details' are returned. For a more complete experience, it could mention typical fields (id, title, etc.).

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?

All three parameters are well-documented in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra information about parameter semantics 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 clearly states 'Get details for a specific outcome group,' which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_outcome_groups' (list all) and 'get_root_outcome_group' (only root).

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 use when you need details of a known outcome group, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. Given the many sibling outcome tools, this lack of guidance may confuse the agent.

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