sn_get_group

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns members, roles, and manager, but does not disclose that it's read-only, any permission requirements, or potential limits (e.g., pagination for large groups). Adequate but not thorough.

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?

Single sentence, 12 words, no redundancy. Front-loaded verb and resource. Every word contributes meaning.

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 low complexity (1 required param, 2 optional booleans) and no output schema, the description covers the key return data (members, roles, manager). Missing mention of read-only nature, but sufficient for this simple lookup tool.

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 low (33%), so the description must compensate. It mentions 'members, roles, and manager,' which hints at the boolean parameters (include_members, include_roles), but does not explain defaults or their effect. Partial compensation, but could be clearer.

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 uses a specific verb ('Look up') and resource ('ServiceNow group'), and lists the key details returned (members, roles, manager). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like sn_create_group or sn_manage_group_members.

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 implies use when group details are needed but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context is left to inference.

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