Move profiles to a group

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

Annotations already declare idempotent=true, destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety bar is partly covered. The description adds genuine context beyond them: group accepts either an id or a name, null explicitly removes membership, and the tool prompts the user before acting — a meaningful behavioral signal for an agent.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler: the primary action comes first, the inverse operation second, and the confirmation caveat last. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

With only two parameters and no output schema, the definition covers what is needed to call the tool correctly, including the null-removal case. It could say more about the return value or failure modes (invalid group name, unknown profile ids), but nothing essential is missing.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It does explain the most consequential parameter (group: id, name, or null-to-remove), but says nothing about profileIds beyond implication, and never mentions the 1–200 item limit or that unknown groups may fail.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Puts profiles into a group') and covers the inverse operation ('takes them out of their group with group null'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like create_group or list_groups, but the action is distinct enough to recognize.

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?

It states one important usage rule — pass group null to remove profiles — plus the 'Asks the user first' confirmation note. There is no guidance on how to obtain a valid group id or name (e.g., via list_groups) or when to prefer grouping over other organization mechanisms.

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