zid_get_group_users

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

The description repeats the readOnlyHint from annotations but adds no further behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or specific response details. With annotations already present, the description contributes minimal additional transparency.

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 (7 words) and front-loaded. It is efficient, though it lacks detail; however, for its length it is well-structured.

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 that an output schema exists, the description could be minimal, but it fails to indicate what the output contains (e.g., user list format). The tool's complexity is low, but the description is too sparse for an agent to fully understand behavior without looking at other sources.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no further meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'Get users in a ZIdentity group (read-only)' clearly states the action (get), resource (users in a ZIdentity group), and read-only nature. It distinguishes from sibling tools like zid_get_group_users_by_name which uses different identifier.

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 use when you have a group_id, but no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives like zid_get_group_users_by_name or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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