list_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns active post counts and descriptions, and implies a read-only list operation. However, it omits details like pagination, ordering, or potential errors, which would matter for a list endpoint. Nothing is misleading, but coverage is only adequate.

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 compact, with the core purpose stated first, followed by a useful cross-tool routing hint and a minimal parameter explanation. Every sentence adds value and there is no fluff.

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 one-parameter list tool, the description plus the available output schema cover what an agent needs to call it correctly. It provides the required school_id semantics and points to related tools for the follow-up action. Minor omissions like pagination or authorization are not critical given the simplicity.

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 schema provides only an integer school_id with no description, so the description's Args section adds real value: it explains the parameter's meaning and tells the agent where to find valid IDs via list_schools. This compensates well for the 0% schema coverage.

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 operation ('List groups at a school') and the expected output content ('active post counts and descriptions'). It is distinct enough from siblings like list_students or list_schools, though it does not explicitly name an alternative it is not.

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 gives practical usage context: it tells the agent to use list_schools to find valid school IDs and points to get_group_feed as the next step for viewing posts. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool, but the chaining guidance is clear and actionable.

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