获取群列表

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with that by using '获取'. It adds useful scope and return-content context ('全部群聊', '群号、群名等') beyond the structured annotations, though it does not mention pagination or response shape.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence, with a parenthetical listing the expected fields. Every word contributes; there is no padding 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only list tool with strong annotations, the description provides the scope and expected content sufficiently. No prerequisites, outputs, or error conditions need to be described for correct invocation.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter-semantics burden; the baseline of 4 applies. The description's mention of returned fields ('群号、群名等') adds a little value beyond the empty 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 states the exact operation ('获取机器人加入的全部群聊列表') with a specific resource and scope. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools such as get_group_info, which targets a single group, and get_group_member_list, which targets members.

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 intended use is implied by the purpose: call this when you need all groups the bot has joined. However, the description gives no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives, so an agent must infer routing from the tool name and sibling context.

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