list_agent_groups

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

The description includes 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait, and mentions the purpose of the returned `agent_group_id`. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does not disclose other potential behaviors like pagination, ordering, or error conditions. The read-only disclosure and output purpose provide moderate transparency, but not complete.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. It front-loads the primary action and filter, then adds the key output detail. Every sentence 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 list tool with one optional parameter and read-only behavior, the description covers the essentials: what it does, the filter, and the important output (agent_group_id). It does not mention pagination or sorting, which could be relevant for large lists, but given the context and lack of output schema, this is likely sufficient.

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 schema has one optional parameter, `name`, with no description. The tool description explains it as an optional filter, which adds meaning beyond the schema. This effectively compensates for the 0% schema coverage, though it could be more specific about the filtering behavior (e.g., exact match vs substring).

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 ('List') and resource ('agent groups'), and clarifies the purpose by linking to `assign_agent_group`. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools by specifying that it provides `agent_group_id`, making its role clear without needing to inspect siblings.

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 explicitly mentions 'optionally filtered by name' and that it provides `agent_group_id` for `assign_agent_group`, giving clear context on when to use it (when you need group IDs for assignment). It does not explicitly name alternates, but the sibling list tools are distinct enough, and this tool is the only one for agent groups.

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