get_user_group

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

The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint (GET /v2/user_groups/{id}) but this is redundant given annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. It does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as authentication, rate limits, or side effects.

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 very concise: two short sentences plus the endpoint line. Every sentence is informative and there is no fluff. The structure front-loads the essential action.

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 simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, and comprehensive annotations), the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what the tool does and what parameter it needs.

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 description mentions the 'provided user group id' but adds no meaning beyond the schema, which already describes the 'id' parameter as 'the unique identifier of the user group'. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('user group'), and specifies it returns the user group by a unique identifier. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like 'get_user_groups' and 'get_user_groups_that_user_is_member' by focusing on a single retrieval 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The user must infer from the tool name and schema alone.

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