bitwarden_list_member_groups

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'currently belongs to' indicates a snapshot of membership. However, it does not explicitly state permissions required, whether the operation is safe/non-mutating, or any rate limits. It is minimally sufficient but not rich.

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 extremely concise, with a single purpose sentence and a brief argument definition. It is front-loaded with the purpose and contains no filler or redundant details.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It specifies the member_id and the intended result. It could mention what happens when the member has no groups (e.g., returns an empty list), but the output schema likely covers the return structure.

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 no descriptions for member_id (0% coverage), but the description compensates by explaining 'member_id: The member's UUID (see bitwarden_list_members).' This tells the agent what the value represents and where to obtain it, which is adequate for a single-parameter 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 clearly states the action: 'List the vault group IDs a member currently belongs to.' This uses a specific verb (List), resource (vault group IDs), and scope (for a member), which distinguishes it from siblings like bitwarden_list_groups (all groups) or bitwarden_list_members (all 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 description does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It only mentions 'see bitwarden_list_members' for the member_id parameter, which is about sourcing the argument rather than choosing an alternative tool. No alternatives like bitwarden_update_member_groups are mentioned.

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