import_group

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

Description indicates mutation (importing) and the two input methods (file_path or sImportData), but lacks details on whether duplicate groups are overwritten, error handling, or permission requirements. Annotations provide non-destructive hint, but behavioral context is minimal.

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 that front-loads purpose and key parameter alternatives. No fluff or redundant information. Ideal conciseness.

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 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the primary usage scenario. It could mention behavior on duplicate group names or validation, but overall sufficient for a straightforward import 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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are documented. The description adds value by clarifying the mutual exclusivity of file_path and sImportData, and the expected file format (.lsg/.csv). This goes beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool's action ('Import a group') and resource (a group from .lsg/.csv file into a survey). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_group by specifying file-based import.

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 usage when a file is available, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., list_groups, add_group) or when not to use it. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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