List groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is clear. The description adds context about return fields (member counts, membership) but does not disclose any behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, or side effects. This is acceptable given the strong annotations, but adds limited behavioral value.

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 that conveys the resource, scope, and key output fields without any fluff or repetition. Every word contributes to clarity.

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 presence of an output schema and comprehensive parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is adequately complete. It clarifies the domain (ParentSquare groups) and highlights notable return data, which is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters (query and school_id), so the schema fully documents them. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 lists ParentSquare groups, with specific subtypes (classes, clubs, committees) and key output fields (member counts, membership status). This specific verb+resource+detail distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_schools or list_links.

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 its usage: it is for listing groups. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear but no explicit guidance is given, so 'implied usage' applies.

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