cached_user_group_memberships_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does add a meaningful permission prerequisite ('Requires Read on Security') and the verb 'Get' implies a read operation. However, it says nothing about not-found behavior, return structure, or side-effect absence, which would be useful for a tool without annotation hints.

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?

Two succinct sentences deliver the core purpose and the permission requirement without any fluff. The essential behavior is front-loaded and every phrase earns its place.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool, the description covers purpose and authorization. It lacks detail on error behavior and return format, especially given there is no output schema, but the simplicity of the operation makes the definition reasonably complete.

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 compensate. It clarifies that userId and groupId are not independent filters but together identify a specific membership record. This adds relational meaning beyond the bare integer types in the schema, though it does not elaborate further on each parameter's semantics.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a precise resource ('membership record for a specific user+group pair'), and the two-parameter composition clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_groups_for_user or get_users_in_group. No ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 the use case: when you need a single membership record for one user+group pair. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer an alternative tool, such as get_groups_for_user, nor does it state exclusions for bulk listing scenarios.

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