list_ip_groups

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this is a safe read-only operation. The description adds the IP version scope but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as default filtering behavior when ip_type is omitted, pagination, or output format. Given the annotation, this is acceptable but could be richer.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter, readOnlyHint, and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but leaves the ip_type parameter semantics ambiguous. It does not clarify whether the parameter filters by IP version or what values are accepted, which is a notable gap. Still, with the output schema present, it is quite complete overall.

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 a single parameter ip_type with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description's parenthetical 'IPv4/IPv6' hints at the parameter's possible values but does not explicitly name the parameter or explain how to use it. This is insufficient compensation for the lack of schema documentation.

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 a specific verb '列出' (list) and a specific resource 'IP 地址分组' (IP address groups), with the parenthetical 'IPv4/IPv6' indicating the IP version scope. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_mac_groups or list_domain_groups.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply states the function without any context about the intended use case.

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