vsz_list_zone_ap_groups

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It only states the action and arguments, without addressing return format, read-only nature, pagination, or authentication requirements.

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 compact, front-loaded with the action, and the Args block is minimal. Every sentence earns its place.

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 list operation with an output schema present, the description adequately covers purpose and parameters. It lacks usage guidance, but the low complexity and schema availability keep it reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description meaningfully clarifies parameters: host is 'vSZ controller IP or hostname' and zone_id is 'Zone UUID,' going beyond the bare schema titles. It does not add detail beyond these types, but it compensates adequately.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('AP groups configured in a specific zone'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like vsz_list_aps or vsz_list_zones.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'in a specific zone' and the required zone_id argument, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions.

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