zpa_list_segment_groups

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds some value by detailing the output format (full record with normalized highlights). However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, potential performance impacts, or the meaning of 'normalized highlights,' which would aid agent decision-making.

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 extremely concise—only two sentences—with no redundant words. The key information (listing operation and output structure) is front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Without an output schema, the description provides useful information about the return format (full record with highlights). However, it omits critical details about pagination (how page and page_size interact), the effect of the search parameter, and the purpose of microtenant_id, leaving gaps for correct usage.

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 coverage is only 20% (only the 'query' parameter has a description). The tool description does not explain the other 4 parameters (page, search, page_size, microtenant_id), forcing the agent to infer their purpose from names alone. This is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 'List ZPA segment groups,' specifying the verb and resource. It also describes the output as full records with normalized highlights, distinguishing it from the sibling tool zpa_get_segment_group which retrieves a single segment group.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., zpa_get_segment_group for a specific group). It also does not mention pagination or filtering options beyond the implicit parameters, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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