ze_list_groupsRetrieve root product groups like Ofertas and Cervejas from Zé Delivery's catalog. This read-only operation lists available categories without placing an order, with markdown or JSON output.
Read-only listRootProductGroups (Ofertas, Cervejas, …). Does not place an order.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| privacy_mode | No | ||
| response_format | No | markdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructuringHint false, so the safety posture is covered. The description adds domain-specific reassurance that no order is placed, which is helpful context, but it does not go beyond that to describe output shape, pagination, or any other behaviors.
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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence is useful for avoiding a dangerous misunderstanding, though the word 'Read-only' is somewhat redundant with the readOnlyHint annotation.
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?
The tool is simple and has strong annotations, so the lack of an output schema is not critical. However, the description does not explain the meaning of privacy_mode or response_format, nor what the returned groups contain beyond the examples. It is adequate but leaves moderate 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain either parameter. The schema exposes enum values for privacy_mode and response_format, but the agent is left to infer their meaning from names alone. This is a clear gap that the description should compensate for.
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 names a specific operation: list root product groups, with concrete examples such as Ofertas and Cervejas. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from ordering tools by stating 'Does not place an order.' This makes the tool's purpose clear and separable from siblings.
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 when to use the tool: when needing a read-only listing of root product groups. It gives one exclusion ('Does not place an order') but does not explicitly describe when to prefer this over sibling tools like ze_list_categories or ze_search, so guidance is present but incomplete.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.