list_util_groups

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

The description indicates this is a read-only listing operation, as implied by 'List'. It also discloses the behavior that 'custom-utils' always exists as a default group, even if never used. However, it does not explicitly state that no modifications are made, but the verb 'list' is sufficient for typical understanding.

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 two sentences long and directly conveys the purpose and a key behavioral note. There is no redundant information, and the structure is clear and front-loaded.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description specifies the returned information (name, folder, member count). It also explains the presence of the default group, covering an important edge case. This is sufficient for a list operation.

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 already provides a comprehensive description for the 'project' parameter, including its default from EASYSPEC_PROJECT. The tool description does not add further parameter details, but the schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is appropriate. The parameter is optional and straightforward.

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 tool's function: 'List util groups in a project' and specifies the returned fields (name, folder, member count). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_flows and list_utils by focusing on util groups.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: to list util groups in a project. It also provides useful context about the default 'custom-utils' group, helping the user understand expected output. The parameter for project path is described in the schema, so no ambiguity.

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