get_zpa_scim_group

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds context by detailing the dual behavior (fetch vs. list), which is beyond the annotations. It does not contradict any annotations, but additional details (e.g., parameter precedence) are omitted.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the purpose and key behaviors. Every word contributes, with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers main use cases but lacks details on the 'search' parameter, behavior when both idp_name and scim_group_id are provided, return format, and error scenarios. Given the parameter count and low schema coverage, it is 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?

With only 25% schema coverage, the description partially compensates by explaining the roles of 'scim_group_id' and 'idp_name'. However, it does not mention 'search' or fully clarify parameter interactions, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 verb ('fetch' or 'list'), the resource ('ZPA SCIM group'), and scoping ('by ID' or 'under a named IdP'). It also notes the read-only nature, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling 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 implies when to use each mode: provide 'scim_group_id' for fetching one group or 'idp_name' for listing groups. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use the tool or mention alternatives among siblings.

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