zia_list_network_svc_groups

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as pagination, result size limits, or data freshness. It is acceptable but minimal.

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 (one sentence, 4 words). While efficient, it might be slightly underspecified for an agent unfamiliar with the domain. Still, it earns its place with no wasted words.

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 no output schema, simple parameters, and many sibling list tools, the description should provide more context (e.g., what fields are returned, if search filters results, pagination). It is too minimal to be fully helpful.

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 coverage is 50%: the 'query' parameter has a detailed description, but 'search' has no description in schema or tool description. The description does not explain the 'search' parameter, leaving the agent without guidance on its syntax or purpose. This is a significant gap.

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 tool lists ZIA network service groups, which is a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool zia_get_network_svc_group (which gets a single group), though it does not explicitly differentiate from other list 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, such as zia_get_network_svc_group for a specific group or other listing tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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