List Group Owners

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It adds the scope of 'Microsoft Entra or Microsoft 365 group' but does not disclose return format, potential empty results, pagination behavior, or any permission requirements. Minimal behavioral detail is given beyond the core action.

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 a single concise sentence with additional Chinese intent phrases. Every part is purposeful and adds value, with 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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description is sufficient for a basic list operation but could benefit from mentioning pagination, default top value, or typical return structure. Overall, it is adequate but not rich.

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%, with both parameters (groupId, top) described. The description adds no additional parameter nuance, so the baseline of 3 applies as the schema already provides adequate meaning.

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 owners of a Microsoft Entra or Microsoft 365 group', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like groups_list_members by focusing on owners, and is further reinforced by the title 'List Group Owners'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as groups_list_members or groups_get. The Chinese intent phrases imply usage scenarios but do not explicitly exclude sibling tools or mention prerequisites.

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