vsz_get_controller_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'List all controllers' and does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, response format, pagination, or lack of side effects. The implied read-only nature is minimal and not explicitly detailed.

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 one sentence for purpose and one for the parameter. It is front-loaded with the key action and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 simple read-only list tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description covers the essentials. It could benefit from clarifying how this differs from similar list tools, but the combination of purpose, parameter explanation, and schema makes it adequately complete.

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 includes an Args section explaining 'host: vSZ controller IP or hostname', which adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema's bare 'Host' property. Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates well for the single 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 'List all controllers in the cluster' clearly states the verb (list), resource (controllers), and scope (in the cluster). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_system_info or get_cluster_state, which concern different resources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or conditions. It simply states the action without context for selection among the many list/get tools in the sibling set.

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