list_groups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It does disclose one behavioral trait: member lists exclude admins/super admins. However, it does not mention pagination, filtering, output structure, or any other behavioral nuances, leaving significant uncertainty.

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 sentence that immediately states the core action. It is succinct and well-structured, with no wasted words or redundant information.

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 tool with 5 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention parameter usage, return format, filtering capabilities, or pagination behavior. The single behavioral trait about admins is not sufficient for a tool of this complexity.

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 has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description provides no explanation of any parameters (name, page, search, default, page_size). This is a critical gap; the agent cannot infer what these parameters do or how to use them.

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 retrieves a list of groups, using a specific verb and resource. The parenthetical 'member lists exclude admins/super admins' adds a scope nuance that helps differentiate it from a generic list operation, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools.

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 when-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or alternatives (e.g., when to use list_groups vs get_group or list_lists). This leaves the agent without guidance on tool selection.

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