toast_list_menu_groups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. The verb 'List' correctly implies a read-only operation and the phrase 'across all menus' clarifies the default scope. However, it does not disclose pagination, response shape, restaurant scoping behavior, or any outcomes beyond simply listing groups.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The parenthetical '(categories)' adds useful disambiguation without adding bulk.

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?

For a simple, optional-parameter list tool, the core behavior is conveyed, but there is no output schema and no mention of what fields a menu group object contains. The blank restaurantGuid description and lack of any usage guidance leave an agent with gaps when deciding whether filtering is needed.

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 only 50%: menuGuid has a description, but restaurantGuid has an empty description. The prose adds no parameter semantics, such as how restaurantGuid interacts with the 'all menus' default or whether menuGuid narrows the result. The description does not compensate for the poorly documented schema.

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 uses a specific verb, 'List', with a clear resource, 'menu groups (categories)', and explicitly says 'across all menus'. This distinguishes it from siblings like toast_list_menus (which lists menus, not groups) and get_items_by_category (which gets items rather than groups).

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 choose this tool over alternatives such as toast_list_menus, get_menu, or get_items_by_category. The description does not say whether this is the right call for obtaining categories for one menu versus all menus, nor does it explain when to use the optional filters.

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