zpa_list_segment_groups

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that each row includes normalized highlights (ids, enabled state, application-segment counts/ids, timestamps). However, it does not disclose pagination behavior or response size limits, which would be valuable for a list tool.

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 compact: one sentence states the operation, a second describes the output characteristics. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only nature and list operation, the description is adequate at a high level, but it lacks details about pagination, search semantics, and microtenant scoping. Without an output schema, more detail about the returned fields and record structure would be useful.

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 only 20%, so the description should compensate by explaining the parameters. It does not mention any of the five parameters, leaving page, search, page_size, and microtenant_id unexplained. Only the query parameter is described in the schema itself.

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 starts with 'List ZPA segment groups', a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies the output structure (full records with normalized highlights), distinguishing it from other list tools in the sibling set, such as zpa_list_app_connector_groups.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that zpa_get_segment_group exists for retrieving a single record, nor does it provide any exclusions or conditions. Usage is only implied by the name.

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