get_user_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It accurately reveals the read-only nature ('Get') and adds the key detail of transitive memberships. However, it does not disclose potential errors, permission requirements, or any operational limits, which would be useful but not critical for a simple read operation.

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 wasted words. It immediately states the action and includes the important qualifier about transitive memberships. Perfectly concise.

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 one parameter and an output schema. The description covers the core behavior and the output schema likely documents return values. It does not mention error conditions, but for a straightforward get operation this is not a significant omission. Overall, the description is sufficient for effective use.

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 has one required parameter, user_id, with 0% schema description coverage. The description's phrase 'by user ID' adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name—it does not clarify format, constraints, or any additional context. The low coverage is not sufficiently compensated by the description.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'all groups for a user', and the specific behavior 'including transitive memberships'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_all_groups and get_group_members by scoping to a single user and clarifying membership type.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need a user's group memberships, including nested ones. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a sibling-aware agent. No direct reference to sibling tools is made.

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