zpa_get_segment_group

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as return format, error handling, or authentication requirements. It only repeats the action 'get' which is implied by the name.

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 one short sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, achieving high conciseness.

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 GET tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what a segment group is, what the response includes, or any edge cases. While annotations cover safety, additional details like typical usage or parameter clarification are missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning parameters (group_id, microtenant_id) have no descriptions in the schema. The description does not compensate by explaining what these parameters mean, what values are expected, or how they affect the call. This is a severe gap.

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 "Get one ZPA segment group" clearly states the action (get) and resource (ZPA segment group), and uses 'one' to distinguish from list operations like zpa_list_segment_groups. It is specific and 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., zpa_list_segment_groups), when to specify microtenant_id, or any prerequisites. The description is just a single statement with no context about selection criteria.

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