beta_testers__beta_groups__list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's addition of the REST endpoint is marginally helpful. No further behavioral traits (e.g., pagination details, rate limits) are disclosed beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Single sentence plus endpoint in brackets is extremely concise and front-loaded. Every character serves a purpose, no fluff.

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 simple list operation, clear annotations, and well-documented schema, the description is complete enough. It includes the REST endpoint which adds value, and the parameters handle pagination expectations.

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 has 100% description coverage for its three parameters (id, limit, next_url), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional semantics for the parameters beyond the schema's definitions.

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?

Description clearly states 'List the beta groups belonging to a beta tester', specifying the verb (list), resource (beta groups), and relationship (belonging to a beta tester). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'beta_testers__apps__list' or 'beta_groups__beta_testers__list'.

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 implicitly indicates usage when needing to retrieve beta groups for a specific beta tester, and the tool name reinforces this. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or mention alternatives, though the context is clear.

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