oci_kafka_list_consumer_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a list with count, state, and type, but does not mention read-only nature, potential performance impact, or any rate limits. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 concise: two sentences that directly state the purpose and return contents. No unnecessary words or repetition. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. It provides enough context for an AI agent to understand its function and differentiate it from sibling tools.

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?

With zero parameters, schema coverage is 100%, and the description does not need to add parameter information. According to guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description mentions the return values, which adds value beyond the input schema.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'all consumer groups in the Kafka cluster', and specifies the returned information (total group count, list with state and type). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like oci_kafka_describe_consumer_group (single group) and oci_kafka_delete_consumer_group (delete operation).

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Usage is implied by the nature of listing all consumer groups, but no exclusions or references to sibling tools are given. For a tool with many siblings, more explicit context would improve usability.

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