Group Rows

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so description carries burden. It describes that rows are moved under a parent and default placement behavior, but does not disclose side effects like removal from previous groups or impact on row ordering within the parent.

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?

Description is structured into sections for each mode and position, uses bullet-style clarity. Every sentence provides distinct information; only minor redundancy in explaining default placement.

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 full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers the two modes and placement options. It could elaborate on the effect on existing row hierarchy, but overall sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining the relationship between group_name and parent_id for the two modes, and clarifying position defaults and requirements (e.g., reference_id needed for 'before'/'after').

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?

Clearly states the tool groups multiple rows under a parent, with two specific modes (create new group or move to existing). The verb 'group' and resource 'rows' are explicit, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like bike_create_rows or bike_update_row.

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?

Provides explicit conditions for using each mode: group_name for new group, parent_id for existing. Also explains position parameter usage. However, lacks guidance on when not to use this tool (e.g., when simpler reordering suffices).

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