list_groups

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict this. The description adds the resource scope but discloses no additional behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, default-farm handling, or response shape. With the read-only annotation covering the safety profile, this is adequate but minimal.

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 no filler or redundancy. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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 low-complexity read-only list tool, the description, combined with the annotated optional schema and readOnlyHint, is largely sufficient. It does not explain return values or default-farm behavior, but the schema covers the parameter and the annotation covers the safety aspect, leaving only minor contextual gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so farm_id is already documented. The description's 'on the farm' only loosely echoes the parameter and adds no deeper meaning about how farm_id behaves, such as the optionality or default-farm fallback.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('animal groups'), making it immediately clear this is a collection-level read operation. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like get_group, create_group, update_group, delete_group, and restore_group, and from other list_* tools that target different resources.

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 usage context is implied: use this to enumerate groups rather than to fetch or mutate a single group. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as get_group for retrieving group details, so the guidance is not directly stated.

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