zms_list_resource_groups

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only', aligning with the readOnlyHint annotation, and adds behavioral details by describing the output structure (one row per group with specific fields) and a prerequisite (ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID). This goes beyond the annotation, covering what the return looks like and an operational requirement. No contradictions with 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 concise, with a clear first sentence stating the purpose, followed by brief clarifying notes on read-only behavior, output fields, and a prerequisite. No wordy or redundant content; every sentence adds value.

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 absence of an output schema, the description provides the expected return structure (one row per group with key fields), and notes read-only status and the customer ID requirement. It lacks details on pagination behavior or how to use the filtering parameters, but these are partially covered by the schema for query. Overall, it is sufficiently informative for a list operation.

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 does not explain any of the five parameters (name, query, page_num, page_size, resource_hostname). While the schema includes a detailed description for query (20% coverage), the tool description itself adds no parameter context. The mention of ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID is a required environment variable, not a parameter. For a low schema coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the other 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 it lists ZMS resource groups and specifies the output fields (id, name, type, origin, member count, CIDRs/FQDNs). It is a specific verb+resource statement that distinguishes it from sibling tools like zms_list_resources or zms_get_resource_group_members.

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 provides minimal usage guidance. It notes the tool is read-only and requires ZSCALER_CUSTOMER_ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use zms_get_resource_group_members for detailed membership). The 'list' action implies use for enumeration, but no clear when/why guidance is given.

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