list_user_groups

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions filtering and pagination but lacks details on permissions, default workspace handling, pagination limits, or whether it is read-only. Given no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 12-word sentence. Every word adds value with no redundancy or wasted space.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core functionality but omits return format, ordering, permission requirements, and pagination defaults. A complete description would include more behavioral and format details.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It indicates 'name' is for filtering, 'page' and 'page_size' for pagination, and 'workspace_id' scopes to a workspace. However, it omits specifics like whether name matching is exact, page size defaults, or workspace fallback. It adds meaning but not enough for full parameter understanding.

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 user groups on the workspace, with optional name filtering and pagination. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_users' which lists individual users, and other list tools.

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 like 'list_users' or other list tools. No exclusions or context are given.

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