iaas_get_security_groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the raw HTTP endpoint path (GET /iaas/api/security-groups), which is minor context, and says nothing about pagination, result size, filtering behavior, or return shape for what is an open-world collection read.

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 text is short and front-loaded, but it wastes lines: "Get security groups" and "Get all security groups" are redundant restatements, and the third line is a raw endpoint path. Two of the three lines add no new 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?

For a read-only list endpoint with no output schema, the description should convey at least the shape or scope of what is returned (list of security groups with what identity fields, whether paged). It provides none of this, so an agent cannot predict the response or decide whether a single-group fetch is needed afterward.

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 100% and the single optional apiVersion parameter is fully documented in the schema with format and a reference to /iaas/api/about. The description adds nothing about the parameter, but per the high-coverage baseline a 3 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 states a clear verb and resource ("Get all security groups") so the basic operation is unambiguous. However, it offers no differentiation from the singular sibling iaas_get_security_group or from related tools like iaas_create_on_demand_security_group, iaas_update_security_group, and iaas_reconfigure_security_group, leaving the agent to infer that this is the list variant.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus iaas_get_security_group (single lookup) or the security-group mutation tools. No prerequisites, no mention of pagination, filtering, or scope. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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