get_group_info_ex

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get group detailed information (extended)' and does not mention any side effects, permissions, rate limits, or what 'extended' entails. For a read operation this is less critical, but the lack of any detail about the response or special behavior leaves the agent guessing.

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 a single short sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource. However, it is so terse that it misses the opportunity to clarify 'extended' or differentiate from get_group_info, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 has no output schema, no annotations, and a sibling named get_group_info that likely serves the basic version, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot know what 'extended' means, what fields are returned, or when to prefer this over get_group_info. The single parameter is documented, but the overall context is under-specified.

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%: the only parameter group_id is described as 'Group ID'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. It does not clarify the format, range, or how to obtain the group_id, but the schema is sufficient for basic invocation.

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 'Get group detailed information (extended)' states a clear verb and resource, but it is vague about what 'extended' means and how it differs from the sibling get_group_info. It does not specify what fields or details are included, so an agent cannot tell exactly what it will get beyond a general sense of 'more detail'.

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 given on when to use this tool versus get_group_info or other group-related tools. The sibling list includes get_group_info, which is likely the basic version, but the description does not explicitly state the relationship or selection criteria. An agent must infer usage from the name and the word 'extended'.

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