list_available_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It accurately describes the read-only behavior (listing enabled groups and auth requirements) with no contradictions. It does not mention rate limits or other behaviors, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines the purpose, and the second provides a practical use case. Information is front-loaded and essential.

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 zero parameters and an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description covers the purpose and a special use case (fresh install). No additional information is needed for completeness.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter information because none exist, which is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 'List every tool group across all providers, which are currently enabled' – a specific verb (list) and resource (tool groups). It distinguishes from sibling tools that list specific resources (e.g., list_resources, list_tools_by_capability), as it focuses on groups and auth requirements.

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 notes the fresh install scenario where this is the only functional tool, providing clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the usage guidance is strong.

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