zia_list_ip_source_groups

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

The description simply restates the listing behavior, which is already implied by the readOnlyHint annotation, and adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, result volume, or permission requirements. It does not contradict the annotations, but it also provides no value beyond them.

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, six-word sentence with no filler, redundant qualifiers, or unnecessary detail. It is front-loaded and maximally concise for the information it conveys.

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 no output schema, no guidance on when to use the tool, and an undocumented 'search' parameter, the description is not complete enough for an agent to reliably invoke the tool beyond the most basic case. The read-only annotation helps, but the resource and parameter semantics remain under-specified.

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 tool description itself says nothing about the two parameters. The input schema documents the 'query' parameter thoroughly, but 'search' has no description, and at 50% schema coverage the description should compensate for the undocumented parameter. It does not.

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 ZIA IP source groups.' uses a specific verb ('List') plus a clear resource, and the ZIA prefix plus plural 'source groups' distinguishes it from siblings like zia_get_ip_source_group and zia_list_ip_destination_groups. It unambiguously identifies what the tool returns.

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. It does not mention related tools such as zia_get_ip_source_group for single-group retrieval, nor any prerequisite or filtering context.

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