ungroup_nodes

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's mention of 'removing the group' is consistent. It adds context about moving children to the parent. No contradictions, but little additional behavioral detail beyond annotations.

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, concise, front-loaded with verb and resource. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

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 one-parameter tool without output schema, the description covers the primary action and effect. Could mention handling of non-GROUP nodes or irreversibility, but annotations cover destructiveness. Nearly 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 coverage is 100%, providing the parameter description with format example. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond reinforcing that nodeIds are for GROUP nodes. Baseline 3.

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 action 'ungroup', the target 'GROUP nodes', and the outcome 'moving their children to the parent and removing the group'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'group_nodes' (opposite) and 'delete_nodes' (removes nodes entirely).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'delete_nodes' and 'reparent_nodes', explicit context for when to ungroup rather than delete or move would be helpful.

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