beta_groups__app__get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the endpoint and the action but no additional behavioral context such as what happens when no app exists or authentication requirements. This meets the baseline where annotations handle safety and the description adds minimal extra value.

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 sentence plus an endpoint annotation, with no filler or repeated information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and every word contributes to understanding.

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 relationship getter with one parameter and strong annotations, the description is nearly complete. It states what it reads and the parameter source, and the endpoint clarifies the API path. Missing a description of the return value, but with no output schema and a straightforward 'get app' semantic, this is a minor gap.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter, with the description 'ID from the matching list call' already explaining the source of the ID. The tool description itself adds no further parameter details, so the baseline 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Read') and the specific resource ('the app for a beta group'), making it distinct from sibling relationship getters like builds__app__get or beta_groups__get. The endpoint '/v1/betaGroups/{id}/app' further reinforces the exact REST operation.

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 usage—if you need the app associated with a beta group, use this tool—but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like beta_groups__get (which retrieves the group itself) or builds__app__get. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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