vsz_list_zones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' implies a read operation, but the description does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, nor does it mention any performance or pagination aspects. It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 a single sentence plus a minimal Args block. Every word earns its place, and it is clearly structured. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

The tool is a simple list operation with an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. It covers the essential purpose and parameter format. It does not mention authentication or prerequisites, but for a read-only list tool this is likely sufficient. Given the output schema richness, the description is complete enough.

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 schema has no description for the host parameter (coverage 0%), but the description's 'Args' section defines host as 'vSZ controller IP or hostname.' This adds meaningful semantic detail about the expected format, beyond what the schema provides.

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 all zones configured on the vSZ controller' with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('zones'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like vsz_get_zone (single zone) by emphasizing 'all 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?

The description implies usage for listing all zones, but does not explicitly compare to vsz_get_zone or mention when to use an alternative. The phrase 'all zones' gives context but no explicit exclusions or alternatives, so it is only implied usage.

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