zid_list_groups

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

The description adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explaining the exact fields returned (id, name, description, dynamic flag, source IdP) and noting the case-insensitive partial-name filter. It does not contradict annotations; it enriches them with return format and filtering behavior.

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 tool description is concise, with a clear first sentence stating the action, then a behavioral note, and a focused parameter hint. No unnecessary words, every sentence earns its place.

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 essential aspects: purpose, read-only nature, return shape, and the key filter. Combined with the schema's extensive query parameter description, it is fairly complete. However, it omits details on limit/offset behavior and the exclude_dynamic_groups filter, though these are inferable from names.

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 explains the `name` parameter well, and the schema includes a detailed description for `query`. However, the remaining parameters (`limit`, `offset`, `exclude_dynamic_groups`) are not explained beyond their names, and with only 20% schema coverage, the description does not fully compensate for the lack of documentation.

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's function as 'List ZIdentity groups' and specifies that it returns lean summaries with a given set of fields, distinguishing it from fetching full records. This is a specific verb+resource description that effectively conveys its purpose.

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 states the tool is read-only and returns lean summaries rather than full SDK records, implying it should be used when only summary information is needed. It also mentions the `name` filter usage. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools like `zid_get_group` or `zid_search_groups`, and lacks exclusion guidance.

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