list-permission-groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states it returns a list, but doesn't mention idempotency, authentication, pagination, or potential errors. The depth is insufficient for a read/list operation.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose and parameter source efficiently with no redundant or unclear wording.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the basic functionality and parameter provenance. It could be improved by clarifying the output structure or pagination, but it is mostly complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 description adds context by noting that productId can be obtained from the list-products endpoint, which goes beyond the schema's description that only says 'The identifier of the Product.'

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 it lists permission groups for a given product, specifying the resource (Permission Groups) and the scope (belongs to a product). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get-permission-group (single) and other list tools by specifying the context.

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 explains when to use the tool (to get all permission groups for a product) and how to obtain the required productId. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the differentiation from get-permission-group is implicit.

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