Get contact groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the verb 'List', such as pagination, ordering, or filtering behavior. It doesn't contradict annotations, but also doesn't enrich them.

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, front-loaded sentence: 'List contact groups.' Every word earns its place, with zero redundancy. Perfectly concise for a zero-parameter list operation.

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?

Given the low complexity (no params, no output schema, strong annotations), the description is minimally sufficient. It states the action and resource. It doesn't detail return format, but the simplicity of the tool makes that acceptable. Slightly more context (e.g., 'returns all groups') could push it higher, but for a list with no knobs, this is complete enough.

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 tool has zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. The empty schema fully documents that there are no inputs.

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 'List contact groups' uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('contact groups') clearly. It distinguishes from siblings like get_contacts (contacts vs groups) and add_contact_group (write vs read).

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 purpose is self-evident: use when you need to fetch all contact groups. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over get_contacts or add_contact_group, and no exclusions or alternatives are named. The usage is implied but not elaborated.

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