List token groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description itself must disclose behavior. It transparently notes that only token group names are returned and hints at low cost. For a simple, read-only listing tool, this is sufficient; no destructive behavior or authentication needs to be stated.

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, concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's output and purpose. Every word adds value, with no filler or repetition.

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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description covers all essential information: what it returns (names only) and its intended use case (low-cost orientation). It is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 has zero parameters, so the description is not required to add parameter meaning. The baseline of 4 applies because the description correctly conveys that no inputs are needed.

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 returns 'token group names only' and frames it as 'the cheapest way to orient before fetching values.' This specific verb-resource combination and the hint about cost/scope effectively distinguish it from sibling tools like get_tokens or get_token, which likely fetch full values.

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 phrase 'cheapest way to orient before fetching values' implies using this tool as a lightweight first step before more expensive operations. It provides context for optimal usage, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name specific alternatives.

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