get_storage_groups

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only states it returns an array of groups for the authenticated requestor. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, error handling, or what 'groups' entail beyond 'apps containing multiple files', leaving significant gaps.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without any wasted words. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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 tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, but has an output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It explains what is returned but lacks details on behavior, authentication scope, or output structure, which the output schema might cover, but more context would improve completeness.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter information is needed in the description. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, earning a baseline high score for not adding unnecessary details.

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 action ('Returns') and resource ('array of groups (apps containing multiple files) currently in storage'), specifying it's for the authenticated requestor. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_storage_files' or 'get_storage_groups_settings', which reduces it from a perfect score.

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 versus alternatives like 'get_storage_files' (for individual files) or 'get_storage_groups_settings' (for settings). The description implies usage for retrieving groups but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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