get_user_groups

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, pagination, or what format the groups are returned in. 'Get' implies a read operation, but no further details are given.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 single-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks information about return format, error handling, or authentication needs. With no annotations and no output schema, more context would be helpful for reliable agent use.

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%, so the schema already fully documents the steam_id parameter. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., doesn't explain what happens if steam_id is omitted when STEAM_ID env var isn't set). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('Steam groups a player is a member of'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_friends_list' or 'get_player_summary' by focusing specifically on group membership. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with all similar tools, preventing 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose is clear, there's no mention of prerequisites, timing considerations, or comparison to other group-related tools (none exist in siblings, but still lacks general usage context).

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