kaiten_list_company_groups

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'List' signals a read-only operation, but the description provides no detail on pagination behavior, default limits, response format, or query semantics. This is minimal transparency for a tool whose behavior is otherwise undocumented.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. 'In Kaiten' is mildly redundant given the tool namespace, but overall it is concise and easy to parse.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too sparse. An agent cannot infer the return shape, default pagination size, whether query filters group names, or whether all company groups are returned by default. The optional parameters are documented in the schema, but broader behavioral context is missing.

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 limit, query, and offset each having a brief description. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, but the schema already provides sufficient information. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the structured schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List company groups.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools like kaiten_list_group_users and kaiten_list_document_groups by naming the company-groups resource. However, it does not elaborate on scope, filtering, or what exactly is returned, so it stops short of the strongest possible clarity.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that list_group_users is for users within a group, nor any conditions or exclusions for using this listing tool. An agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and context.

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