zms_list_agent_groups

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

Annotations already indicate read-only. The description adds that it returns specific fields (group name, type, agent count, etc.) and supports JMESPath filtering, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and efficiently covers purpose, return fields, and special feature without extraneous words.

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 the simple read-only nature, the description is largely complete. It covers the action, return data, and key parameter features. However, it could mention that all parameters are optional and that the tool is for ZMS.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description mentions pagination and search and references JMESPath filtering, but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'ZMS agent groups', and features like pagination and search. It also distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'ZMS agent groups' and mentioning returns fields and JMESPath filtering.

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 agent groups with pagination/search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., zms_list_agents). No when-not or 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.