connects_groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing 'local pagination over at most 1,000 matches,' which is not inferable from the annotations or schema. This is a meaningful extra constraint.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and adds the most important behavioral caveat (pagination cap). No words are wasted.

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?

With five parameters, no schema descriptions, and an output schema present, the tool is mostly self-explanatory for a simple list/search operation. However, the lack of guidance on 'query' and 'category' semantics, and the absence of any alternative-routing notes, leaves moderate gaps for an agent trying to invoke it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the schema's lack of parameter explanations. It hints at 'mine' via 'your memberships' and at limit/offset via 'local pagination,' but it does not explain 'query' or 'category' semantics, which remain ambiguous despite the schema's type information.

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 states a clear action ('Find') and resource ('groups/clubs or your memberships'), and the plural name distinguishes it from the singular 'connects_group' sibling. It does not explicitly name the sibling alternative, but the scope is specific enough for an agent to understand the tool's role.

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 usage for searching groups/clubs or listing memberships, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like connects_group or connects_people. There is no exclusion or comparison guidance, leaving the routing decision largely to inference.

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