workspace_groups_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by detailing the return format with 8 specific fields. However, it doesn't mention potential limitations like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions that would be helpful for a list operation.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections: purpose statement, return value details, use cases, and related operations. Every sentence adds value with zero wasted words. The bulleted format for return fields enhances readability without sacrificing conciseness.

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 list operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides excellent coverage of purpose, usage, and return format. However, it lacks information about behavioral aspects like pagination, sorting, or error handling that would make it fully complete.

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 only one parameter (ctx) with 0% schema description coverage. The description doesn't mention parameters at all, which is acceptable for a zero-parameter tool. However, since there is technically one optional parameter, a perfect score would require acknowledging it exists.

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 ('List') and resource ('all workspace groups accessible to the user in SingleStore'), providing specific scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'workspaces_info' which lists workspaces within groups, establishing clear differentiation.

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?

Explicitly provides two primary use cases ('Get workspace group IDs for other operations' and 'Plan maintenance windows') and names a specific alternative tool ('Use workspaces_info to list workspaces within a group'). This gives clear guidance on when to use this tool versus related operations.

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