buddypress_list_xprofile_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read operation, the description doesn't address important behavioral aspects: whether this requires authentication, what the response format looks like (especially given no output schema), whether results are paginated, or if there are any rate limits. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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 extremely concise at just three words ('List XProfile field groups'), which efficiently communicates the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple listing operation with minimal parameters.

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 context of a listing operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. While the purpose is clear, there's no information about response format, authentication requirements, error conditions, or how this tool relates to other BuddyPress tools. For a tool in a rich ecosystem with many sibling tools, more contextual guidance would be helpful for the agent to use it effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'fetch_fields' clearly documented in the schema as 'Include fields in response'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides. According to scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no parameter information in the description.

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 'List XProfile field groups' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('XProfile field groups'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'buddypress_get_xprofile_group' (singular) or 'buddypress_list_xprofile_fields' (fields rather than groups), leaving some ambiguity about when to use this specific listing tool versus other related 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. With sibling tools like 'buddypress_get_xprofile_group' (singular retrieval) and 'buddypress_list_xprofile_fields' (listing fields rather than groups), the agent has no indication whether this is the primary listing tool, whether it should be used for bulk retrieval, or what distinguishes it from other listing tools in the BuddyPress ecosystem.

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