pbs_groups_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It declares 'READ-ONLY', indicating no side effects, and warns about adversarial free text in backup IDs and comments. This adds important context beyond the input schema, though it omits potential performance or throttling details.

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 short, two sentences, with critical information front-loaded ('READ-ONLY'). Every sentence adds value: the main action, adversarial warning, sibling comparison, and config requirement. No redundant text.

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?

The description covers the tool's role (group-level listing), required config, and relationship to siblings. An output schema exists, so return values are handled. Missing mention of namespace filtering (ns parameter), but the schema documents it. Overall, complete for a list tool with good schema support.

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% (all parameters documented). The description does not add extra meaning to any parameter beyond the schema; it mentions output fields but not input parameters. Baseline score of 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 clearly states 'list backup groups in a PBS datastore' with a specific verb ('list') and resource ('backup groups'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool pbs_snapshots_list by noting 'Group-level view — pbs_snapshots_list shows the individual snapshots inside a group.' The fields returned are listed, providing specificity.

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 explicitly provides usage guidance: it contrasts with pbs_snapshots_list for when to use each, and mentions the prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PBS_* config'. The 'ADVERSARIAL' note warns about free-text content, aiding appropriate use.

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