list_groups

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes the read-only nature and what fields are returned, but does not mention pagination, performance, or access restrictions. Still, for a simple list tool it is sufficiently 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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence fronts the core function, and the second adds contextual usage. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's low complexity (no parameters, simple list), the description covers purpose, usage relationship to other tools, and what to expect in return (group details). It is complete for its scope.

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 has zero parameters (100% coverage). The description does not need to add parameter details. According to the rule, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4, which is appropriate.

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 the tool lists all Signal groups the account belongs to, specifying included fields (name, ID, members, admin list). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_group, update_group, and leave_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?

Explicitly explains that the returned group_id is required for send_group_message, send_group_attachment, and update_group, and mentions update_group for modification and leave_group for exiting. Provides clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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