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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the nuance of returning 'all' queue groups within the account, but does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, or filtering behavior.

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, focused sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words or repetition. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

While the tool appears simple, the presence of an undocumented parameter is a significant gap. The description does not explain the parameter or describe the return format, making the tool contextually incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The input schema includes an optional parameter item_id with only type and minimum constraints, and the description provides zero explanation of its purpose. With 0% schema description coverage and no mention in the description, the agent cannot understand what item_id does.

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 states the tool lists all queue groups in the user's account, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_queue or list_pending_queue_items by focusing on queue groups rather than queue items.

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 this tool should be used when you need to list queue groups, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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