groups

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

The description adds context beyond the annotation: it states 'Read-only, no side effects' and 'Returns JSON with group list', which reinforces the readOnlyHint and specifies output format. No contradictions.

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 sentences, each earning its place. Front-loaded with main purpose, no fluff, efficient and well-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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no required, no output schema), the description provides sufficient information about the output format (JSON with group list) and the parameters (user and raw). No gaps.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions parameters indirectly via 'for a specified user or the current process'.

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 group names and IDs for a user or the current process. It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly specifying what this tool does not do and pointing to alternatives ('id', 'whoami').

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use for verifying group membership, not for full user identity (use 'id') or current username (use 'whoami'). Also references sibling tools directly.

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