fiken_list_groups

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

The description aligns with readOnlyHint (safe read) but adds little beyond the annotation. It states 'all' groups but doesn't clarify pagination behavior despite page and pageSize parameters, leaving ambiguity.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it lacks important details about parameters and output. It is not overly verbose but misses opportunities to inform.

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?

Without output schema or param descriptions, the description is incomplete. It doesn't describe the return structure or pagination, which is essential for a list tool with two optional parameters.

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 mention page or pageSize parameters. No explanation of their meaning or usage, so the schema carries the full burden without help.

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 uses specific verb 'Returns' and resource 'customer groups', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools by focusing on customer groups, though it could be more explicit about the company context.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't explain what customer groups are or why one might list them, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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