tool_groups

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

No annotations provided, and the description only mentions returns. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, prerequisites, or whether any state is affected. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with verb and result. No extraneous words. Every word is necessary and earns its place.

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?

No output schema is provided, so the description must explain return values. It mentions 'resolved active tool groups' and 'descriptions,' which gives a basic idea but lacks specific structure (e.g., format of group descriptions). Adequate for a simple query but could be more detailed.

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 is empty (0 parameters), so schema coverage is 100%. No parameter descriptions are needed, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable.

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 returns 'resolved active tool groups' and 'descriptions of every available group,' specifying the verb 'returns' and resource 'tool groups.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like tool_catalog and tool_reset by focusing on 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., tool_catalog or tool_reset). The description only states what it does without context on use cases or exclusions.

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