zid_get_user_groups

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces that it is 'Read-only' and describes the return fields. However, it does not explain behavioral traits like pagination (via limit/offset), error handling, or performance implications. The optional parameters' behavior is left implicit.

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: two sentences that cover purpose, input, read-only nature, and return format. Every sentence adds value with no extraneous text.

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 the return format (lean group summaries with specific fields) and the primary input. However, it omits explanations of the optional parameters (limit, offset, query) and does not describe pagination or error conditions. For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema, this is moderately complete but has gaps.

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 description coverage is only 25% (only 'query' has a description). The tool's description does not add any detail about parameters like 'user_id', 'limit', or 'offset'. It merely mentions 'by user ID' but lacks format, constraints, or interaction semantics, leaving 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 verb 'List', the resource 'groups a ZIdentity user belongs to', and the key input 'by user ID'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'zid_get_user_groups_by_name' by specifying the lookup method, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 usage for listing a user's groups but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'zid_get_user_groups_by_name' (for name-based lookup) or when not to use it. No prerequisites or contextual guidance are provided.

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