list_variable_groups

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that secret values are never returned, implying read-only behavior and no side effects. For a simple listing tool, this is sufficient, though it could mention pagination or rate limits.

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 well-structured sentences. First states purpose, second adds a critical usage note. No fluff, front-loaded.

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?

No output schema, so description must compensate. It mentions group names are returned but doesn't describe the full output structure (e.g., array with IDs, names). Also doesn't clarify that both parameters are optional but at least one might be needed. Adequate but not 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond repeating 'team or app'. Both parameters already have clear schema descriptions.

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 tool lists variable groups for a team or app in Codemagic. It distinguishes from siblings like list_variables and create_variable_group by specifically mentioning groups and their use in trigger_build.

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 explains when to use the tool (to list variable groups) and hints at usage in trigger_build. It also warns that secrets are not returned, advising to use the UI for secrets. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other list tools or specify prerequisites like providing at least one parameter.

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