list_log_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists log groups but lacks details on permissions required, pagination behavior, rate limits, or error handling. For a read operation with no annotation coverage, this is insufficient behavioral disclosure.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by clear sections for Args and Returns. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basic purpose and parameter semantics adequately. However, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like permissions or pagination, which are important for a list operation, making it minimally complete but with gaps.

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 description adds meaningful context for the single parameter: 'compartment_id: OCID of the compartment to list log groups from.' This clarifies the parameter's purpose and format (OCID), compensating for the 0% schema description coverage. Since there is only one parameter, the baseline is high, and the description effectively explains it.

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's purpose: 'List all log groups in a compartment.' It specifies the verb ('List') and resource ('log groups'), and the scope ('in a compartment') is explicit. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_logs' or 'search_logs', which prevents a score of 5.

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. It mentions no prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'list_logs' or 'search_logs', leaving the agent to infer usage context independently.

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