List Groups Ai Providers Prompts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it says nothing about authentication/group scoping, pagination, ordering, or what a prompt record contains. A single three-word phrase leaves an agent with no behavioral context for a listing 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 text is short but that brevity reflects under-specification rather than economy; there is no structure, front-loaded scope, or actionable detail. It is a fragment, not a useful sentence.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the definition still omits scope, routing versus siblings, and the sole parameter's semantics. For a listing tool in a large sibling set, this is far from complete enough to call 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?

The one parameter (accept-language) has 0% schema description coverage, and the description provides no compensating explanation of its meaning or effect. Nothing beyond the raw parameter name is conveyed.

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?

"Get Ai Prompts" is essentially a restatement of the tool name list_groups_ai_providers_prompts, with no added detail about scope (group-level? admin? self?). It does not distinguish this from close siblings such as list_admin_groups_by_group_ai_providers_prompts or get_groups_ai_providers_providers_by_provider.

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 gives no indication of when to use this tool versus the many sibling list/get tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. Usage can only be inferred from the name itself.

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