get_all_agent_groupsRetrieve all Freshservice agent groups with pagination to review team assignments and support routing.
List agent groups.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number, starting at 1 | |
| per_page | No | Records per page (max 100) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name, such as pagination behavior or how empty results are handled.
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 short sentence and is front-loaded, but it is essentially a restatement of the title and omits any useful context. Its brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than efficient clarity.
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 two optional pagination parameters, full schema descriptions, an output schema, and rich annotations. For that complexity level the description is minimally adequate, though it still leaves sibling selection and list behavior unaddressed.
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 page and per_page documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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?
States a clear verb ('List') and resource ('agent groups'), so the agent knows this is a read operation returning multiple agent groups. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as get_agent_group or get_all_agents, so it falls short of a 5.
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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and does not mention alternatives like get_agent_group for a single group or get_all_agents for agents. Usage is only implied by the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.