postmd_list_groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it requires a specific API key scope (groups:read) and states that results are paged. This helps the agent understand prerequisites and response behavior without contradicting the read-only annotation.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action, then efficiently adds the auth requirement and paging behavior. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with no required parameters and full schema coverage, the description covers the essential operational context: purpose, permission requirement, and pagination. It does not specify pagination defaults or page-size limits, but those are not necessary for basic invocation.

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 clear descriptions for both optional parameters ('1-based page number' and 'Items per page'). The description adds only the general 'Paged' behavior, which does not meaningfully expand on what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('List groups') and further scopes it to 'the key's member belongs to,' making it clear this is about the authenticated member's group memberships. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_group_documents (documents in a group) and list_my_notes (notes), even without naming them.

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 clear context: it lists groups for the API key's member, requires groups:read permission, and is paged. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the purpose and auth requirement make the intended usage clear.

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