List consumer groups

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the transparency burden. 'List' makes the read-only behavior evident, and 'and their protocol types' discloses what the output contains. It does not mention ordering, empty results, or scope, but for a simple list operation this is largely transparent.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It includes the action, the target resource, and the relevant output detail efficiently.

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 description is sufficiently complete for a no-arg tool, since it states both the resource and the returned information. Without an output schema, a little more detail about the exact shape or scope of the returned list would improve completeness, but the gap is minor.

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 input schema is empty, so there are no parameters to document. With zero required parameters and complete schema coverage, the description does not need to add parameter semantics.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('consumer groups') and adds a useful output detail ('and their protocol types'). The plural 'consumer groups' and 'list' wording distinguish it from the sibling describe_consumer_group.

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 word 'List' implies use when an overview of consumer groups is needed, but the description does not explicitly explain when to prefer this over describe_consumer_group or when not to use it. No alternatives or exclusions are given.

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