get_groups

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

With no annotations, the description offers minimal behavioral context. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, if authentication is required, or any rate limits. The name 'get' implies idempotency, but additional details are absent.

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 extremely concise (single sentence, 10 words) and front-loaded with the core action. However, it could include a brief note about parameters or output without losing conciseness.

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 lack of an output schema, the description does not explain what the returned groups contain (e.g., IDs, names). It also omits details about pagination behavior, which is essential given the page/per_page parameters.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no further meaning to the parameters, which are well-documented in the schema with types and enums.

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 specifies the action ('Get a list') and the resource ('all groups'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'get_group' which implies fetching a single group. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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 over other list tools like 'get_users' or 'get_policies'. It also fails to mention typical use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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