zpa_list_app_connector_groups

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares the operation is safe, and the description explicitly states 'read-only', which matches but adds no new behavioral details. There is no mention of pagination, return format, or any other operational behavior beyond the annotation. This is adequate but not enhanced.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently conveys the core action and the read-only nature, earning a high score for conciseness and structure.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is grossly incomplete. It fails to mention any of the parameters, their purposes, or the expected output. It is barely more than a title, making it inadequate for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 provides zero information about parameters such as page, page_size, search, or microtenant_id. Given that schema description coverage is only 20% (only the query parameter has a description), the description should compensate but does not. An agent gets no help understanding what these parameters do or how to use them.

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 states the verb 'List' and the specific resource 'ZPA app connector groups', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like zpa_get_app_connector_group (which retrieves a single group). This is a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as zpa_get_app_connector_group for a single group, or zpa_list_app_connectors for connectors. The description only states what it does, not the context in which it should be chosen.

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