Retrieve Zabbix host groups filtered by name keyword, with an adjustable limit to control result count.
查询主机群组列表
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | 群组名称关键词（模糊搜索） | |
| limit | No | 返回数量（默认50） |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says '查询' (query), which implies a read operation, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, return format, filtering semantics beyond schema, or any potential side effects.
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, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse, though it offers very little information beyond the bare purpose.
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?
The tool is simple with only two optional parameters and an output schema available, so the minimal description is not severely inadequate. However, it lacks usage context and behavioral details, making it only minimally complete for reliable agent selection and 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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with both 'name' and 'limit' parameters already described in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 '查询主机群组列表' clearly states a specific action (query) and resource (host group list). It is not a tautology and is distinguishable from sibling tools like hostgroup_get_hosts, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as hostgroup_get_hosts or host_get. The description simply states what the tool does without any context, exclusions, or preferred scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.