sassy_tool_groups

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses what the tool returns (loaded groups, tool counts, descriptions) and implies a read-only operation by saying 'List' and 'Shows.' While it does not explicitly state 'no side effects,' the read-only nature is strongly implied. This is sufficient for a simple listing tool, and the output schema further clarifies the response format.

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 three sentences, each earning its place. The first states the core purpose, the second adds useful details about the output, and the third directs to the relevant sibling for modifications. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 description, combined with the output schema, provides a complete picture. It explains what information the tool presents (groups, load status, counts, descriptions) and gives a clear alternative for toggling. There are no missing prerequisites or edge cases to mention for such a simple read-only tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to add beyond what the schema already provides (an empty properties object). Baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not introduce any irrelevant parameter information.

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 the tool's function: 'List available tool groups and their load status.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('tool groups'), and the additional detail about tool counts and descriptions distinguishes it from siblings like sassy_tool_catalog or sassy_setup_status. There is no ambiguity.

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 explicitly provides an alternative: 'Use sassy_tool_group_toggle to enable/disable groups.' This tells the agent when to use this tool (viewing) versus when to use a different tool (modifying). It also implies this tool is for read-only inspection, which is clear guidance.

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