GroupClassesGetDetail

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, so there is no contradiction. However, it adds little beyond the annotations besides the 'single group class by id' scope, and it does not disclose error behavior, authorization needs, or response characteristics.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the resource and the lookup criterion 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?

For such a simple getter, the description is mostly adequate, but it lacks guidance on whether classId is actually required despite the schema saying optional, and there is no output schema or return-value description. Sibling context helps, but some ambiguity remains.

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 fully documents classId, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions 'by id' which maps to classId, but it does not clarify the awkwardness of the schema marking the parameter optional while the description implies an id is needed.

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 clear verb ('get'), a specific resource ('details of a single group class'), and the lookup key ('by id'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like GroupClassesGetList and IndividualClassesGetDetail without needing to open the schema.

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 the tool should be used when an agent needs details for one specific group class by its id, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as GroupClassesGetList for lists. The usage context is understandable but not fully spelled out.

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