list_user_groups

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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavior. It states returns fields (id, name, handle, member list) but does not disclose if any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. However, 'list' implies read-only, so adequate.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return values, followed by usage hint. No unnecessary words.

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?

No output schema, but description mentions return fields. Parameters are fully documented. Lacks pagination/error info, but adequate for a simple listing tool.

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 coverage is 100% with good descriptions. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond schema (e.g., finding group_id). Baseline 3 is appropriate as description doesn't compensate for any missing schema info.

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 it lists user groups (teams) with their members, using specific verb 'list' and resource 'user groups'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create/delete/update_user_group by its read-only nature.

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 states use case: 'Use to find a group_id before mentioning or assigning a group.' Does not explicitly say when not to use, but context implies it's for read-only retrieval, distinct from mutation siblings.

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