zid_get_user_groups_by_name

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

The description clearly states it is read-only, consistent with annotations, and details the resolution algorithm and return behavior ('lean group summaries for the first matching user'). It adds value beyond annotations by explaining partial matching logic.

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?

Three concise sentences covering purpose, read-only nature, and resolution logic. No redundant information; every sentence is valuable.

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 tool purpose and resolution logic but lacks details on pagination, error handling, or output structure (only mentions 'lean group summaries'). With no output schema, more specificity on return fields would improve completeness.

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 description clarifies the 'name' parameter's resolution semantics (email, login, display name) but does not explain 'limit', 'offset', or 'query' beyond what the schema already provides for 'query'. With low schema description coverage (25%), more parameter explanation would be beneficial.

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 explicitly states 'List a ZIdentity user's group memberships' using a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'by name' resolution. It is clear and 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 explains the user resolution logic (case-insensitive partial match) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'zid_get_user_groups' or 'zid_search_groups'. No when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned.

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