zms_list_agent_groups

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation by stating 'Read-only' and adds that it requires ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID, providing useful prerequisites. It also describes the output format, though it does not mention pagination or error behavior, which are less critical given the annotation.

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 concise, using only two sentences with no redundant information. It is well-structured, starting with the core action and then detailing the output and a key requirement.

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 simple list operation, the description adequately covers the primary purpose, output fields, and required input. It does not explain pagination or error handling, but given the read-only nature and the schema's default pagination parameters, this is reasonably complete.

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 input schema defines six parameters, but only 'query' has a description, and the tool description does not explain the purpose of page, sort, search, sort_dir, or page_size. This leaves most parameters ambiguous, and the description adds no clarification beyond the schema.

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 lists ZMS agent groups and specifies the returned fields (eyez_id, name, type, cloud provider, agent count, policy/tamper status), distinguishing it from related tools like zms_list_agents and zms_get_agent_group_totp_secrets.

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?

It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The purpose is clear, but there is no guidance on selection among sibling list tools, such as zms_list_agents or zia_list_locations.

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