getGroups

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers the read-only nature, and the description's 'List' is consistent with that. However, the description adds no behavioral detail such as pagination, ordering, response format, or whether all groups or only visible groups are returned.

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 short and front-loaded with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity sacrifices useful context.

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?

This is a simple read-only list tool with one required parameter that is documented in the schema. However, with no output schema and no description of return structure, pagination, or usage context, the definition is only minimally viable and leaves notable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the required pathParams.format or explain the json/xml alternatives. It adds no meaning beyond what the input schema already shows, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 'List groups' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating this is a read operation for multiple groups. It distinguishes from siblings like getGroup, createGroup, and deleteGroup, though it does not elaborate on scope or variant behavior.

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 about when to use getGroups versus getGroup, getMemberships, or search. The description provides no context for selecting this tool over alternatives.

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