zid_search_groups

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description aligns by stating 'Read-only.' It goes beyond annotations by explaining that results are 'curated group summaries' and the critical empty-result behavior with a warning not to retry with split keywords or no filter. This is excellent context that saves the agent from wasting calls.

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 short sentences. The first states purpose and read-only nature; the second adds the curated summary and the empty-result warning. Front-loaded and every word contributes value, with no redundancy.

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?

For a search tool without an output schema, the description adequately covers the return behavior (curated summaries) and the critical empty-result semantics. It lacks mention of pagination or advanced filtering, but those are common patterns. Given its simplicity, the description is fairly complete, though it could add a note about default pagination.

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?

Only the 'name' parameter is explained (case-insensitive partial match), while 'limit', 'offset', and 'query' are left undocumented in the description. The schema provides a detailed description for 'query', but limit and offset have no guidance. With low schema coverage (25%), the description should clarify pagination and the role of these parameters, but it does not.

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 searches ZIdentity groups by name with a case-insensitive partial match and is read-only. This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like zid_list_groups (full list) and zid_get_group (exact lookup). The scope is 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 name-based searches but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It does not say 'when not to use,' but the purpose is clear enough that an agent would infer that for other filters, other tools are appropriate. Slight improvement could add explicit references to zid_list_groups or zid_get_group as alternatives.

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