reach_listContactGroupsV1

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

The description states it 'gets a list', implying read-only behavior, but with no annotations, it fails to disclose any additional behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or scope of the list (e.g., all groups in an account).

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 very short (two sentences) and directly conveys the core functionality without extraneous information.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides the minimum necessary information. However, it could be improved by mentioning the scope of the list or expected response format, especially since no output schema is provided.

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 no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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 retrieves a list of contact groups, which is the purpose. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like reach_listContactsV1 or reach_listSegmentsV1, though the name provides some differentiation.

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 implies usage (when you need a list of contact groups) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or limitations.

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