splitwise_get_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains the conceptual meaning of groups but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, non-destructive, or has no side effects. The name 'get_groups' implies safety, but the description could be more explicit.

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?

Two short sentences that are front-loaded with the main action. The first sentence states what it does, the second provides clarifying context. No wasted words, every sentence adds value.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete enough. It explains the purpose and what a group represents. However, it does not mention potential limitations like pagination or data freshness, which might be relevant for a list operation.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate as the description explains the tool's purpose without needing to elaborate on parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the action 'List' and the resource 'all groups for the current user'. It also distinguishes from the sibling tool 'splitwise_get_group' by implying it returns a list rather than a single group. The explanation of what groups are adds context, making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 implies the tool is for listing all groups, and siblings like 'splitwise_get_group' are for specific groups, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. No exclusion criteria or fallback guidance is provided, though the simplicity reduces the need.

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