ztw_list_ip_source_groups_lite

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 that it uses the lite endpoint and returns the same records, providing some context but no additional behavioral traits like pagination or performance.

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 with just two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds the crucial comparison to the sibling. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 sibling tool 'ztw_list_ip_source_groups', the description explains the difference and implies the return structure is identical. Missing some detail about the 'search' parameter, but overall sufficient for this simple listing tool.

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 input schema has 2 parameters with 50% description coverage (only 'query' has a description). The description does not add any information about the parameters' meaning or usage. It does not compensate for the missing 'search' parameter description.

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 the verb 'List', the resource 'ZTW IP source groups', and specifies the lite endpoint. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'ztw_list_ip_source_groups' by noting it uses a lighter endpoint and returns the same records.

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 clear context by comparing with 'ztw_list_ip_source_groups', implying this tool is for when the lite endpoint is preferred. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling name and description make the distinction clear.

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