Search Groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'by name' scoping constraint, which is useful, but it doesn't disclose other behaviors like pagination, result ordering, or rate limits. This matches the calibration example for get_calls, which also received a 3.

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 wasted words. It is concise and appropriate for a simple search tool.

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 straightforward search tool with an output schema and readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description covers the essential purpose. It lacks usage guidance, but the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema reduce the burden. The 'by name' qualifier adds a key constraint, making it reasonably complete.

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% with both 'query' and 'limit' parameters documented in the schema. The description adds the 'by name' qualifier but does not provide additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 tool searches for Facebook groups by name, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from people/page/post search siblings by specifying 'by name', though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar group-related tools like get_group.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_group, search_pages, or other search tools. The description simply states what it does without usage context or exclusions.

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