get_user_groups

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing auth injection, rate limiting (LearnWorlds 30-per-10s cap), retry behavior on 429/5xx, and the error payload structure for non-2xx responses. This gives the agent a realistic picture of side effects and failure modes, with no contradiction to readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint.

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 longer than strictly necessary but well-structured with labeled sections (Behavior, Parameters, Returns, Use when). It front-loads the core purpose and every section adds useful information, though some redundancy with annotations exists.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers return format, pagination semantics, error handling, auth, and rate limiting. It also points to related tools, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke this tool appropriately.

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 for the single parameter is 100%, and the description merely reinforces pagination with 'walk them with page.' It adds some intent context but does not materially enrich the schema's description of the page parameter.

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 tool 'Gets all user groups' and specifies it returns a list of all user groups of the school, with sorting and pagination details. This unambiguous verb+resource statement distinguishes it from singular 'get_user_group' and other sibling tools.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'safe to call speculatively for lookups and reporting' and 'Not for changing anything — use the matching 🟡 write tool.' It also lists related user group tools, but does not explicitly contrast when to prefer this list tool over get_user_group or get_users_user_group beyond the plural/scope distinction.

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