Search Microsoft 365 Groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about the use case (finding group ID) but does not describe pagination, result format, or potential multiple matches. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and immediately followed by actionable workflow guidance. No redundant or filler content; every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simple search functionality, annotations covering read-only safety, and full schema parameter descriptions, the description provides sufficient context. It clearly states the primary use case and output dependency (group ID), making it complete for an agent to decide when to use it. A minor gap is the lack of explicit mention of return structure, but output structure is not required here.

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 all parameters fully described. The description adds no new parameter-specific details beyond referencing display name, which is already in the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the semantic load.

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?

Description explicitly states the tool searches Microsoft 365 groups by display name, with a clear verb+resource+scope. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it provides the group ID required by planner_list_plans, aligning with sibling tool names like planner_list_plans.

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 clear context: 'Use this first to find the group ID required by planner_list_plans.' This implies when to use it in a workflow, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the implied sibling relationship.

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