mixer_group_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. The term 'capped' hints at a limit but does not specify the cap amount or behavior when the limit is reached. It does not mention pagination, sorting, or any side effects, and the absence of annotations leaves the description carrying the full burden without sufficient detail.

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 very concise, a single short sentence. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose. However, the parenthetical 'capped' is vague and could be elaborated, but overall it is efficient and not overly verbose.

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 tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is relatively complete for a simple listing function. However, the lack of detail about the cap and missing usage context makes it less complete than ideal. It adequately describes the basic function but leaves out important behavioral 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (i.e., no parameters to document). With no parameters, the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description is adequate.

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?

Description is clear: 'List every mixer group in the project (capped).' It specifies the verb (list) and the resource (mixer groups in the project), and the parenthetical 'capped' suggests a limit. It distinguishes from similar sibling tools like mixer_group_info and mixer_group_rename by focusing on listing all groups.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when it's appropriate to list mixer groups or how it differs from related tools like mixer_group_info. The description only states the function without providing context on usage.

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