get_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the main behavior — returning full group details including member lights and scenes — but does not mention possible error behavior, whether the operation is read-only, or any side effects. For a simple getter this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the tool's purpose and expected output, and the Args section provides the only necessary parameter guidance without any fluff.

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 low-complexity, single-parameter getter, the description is mostly complete: it states what is returned and how to find the ID. An output schema exists to cover return-value details. It could add explicit error or invalid-ID behavior, but that 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 provides only the type 'string', so the description adds meaningful parameter context by explaining that group_id is a numeric group ID and that list_groups should be used to discover IDs. It does not specify exact format or constraints, but for a single parameter this is strong added value.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Get full details of a light group including member lights and scenes.' It clearly identifies what the tool returns and distinguishes it from list_groups and get_light, which operate at a different scope.

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 gives clear context: use this tool to fetch full details for a specific light group, and use list_groups to discover valid IDs. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives for the same task, but the purpose and sibling relationship make the intended use clear.

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