hcloud_list_groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the annotations — no pagination behavior, no indication of what 'limit' defaults to or caps at, and no note that results may span domains. With annotations carrying the burden this is a modest gap, but zero added context is a 2.

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?

Four words, front-loaded with verb and resource, with zero wasted phrasing. It is concise but borders on under-specified rather than richly structured.

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 simple one-parameter list operation with annotations covering safety and a fully described schema, the description is minimally adequate. It omits pagination semantics and scope context (domain/project) that an agent would want, but there is no output schema or nested structure demanding more.

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 coverage is 100% and the single 'limit' parameter is already documented as 'Max results'. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies rather than a higher score.

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 specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('IAM user groups'), which distinguishes it from neighbors like hcloud_list_users, hcloud_list_user_policies, and hcloud_list_lts_groups. It does not explicitly contrast with any sibling, but the resource noun is narrow enough to be unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., IAM permissions or domain/region scope), and no mention of alternatives when a single group's details are wanted. Usage is only inferable from the verb itself.

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