vsz_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (page 1-indexed, limit max 1000) and filter format (JSON string), which are useful behavioral constraints. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, or describe error handling, rate limits, or what happens with invalid query types.

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 well-structured with a lead sentence, a list of supported types, and an Args block. It is not overly long, but repeats the query type list twice and ends with 'etc.', which is vague. Each sentence earns its place, though it could be tighter.

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 description covers the core function and parameter details, and an output schema exists so return values are defined. However, it lacks important context such as when to use this generic query versus the specialized sibling tools, and it does not provide examples or structure for the JSON filters, leaving the description adequate but with clear gaps.

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 adds substantial meaning to every parameter beyond the schema: host is an IP/hostname, query_type is enumerated, filters is a JSON string, page is 1-indexed, limit has a maximum of 1000, and full_text_search is free-text. Since schema descriptions are 0% covered, this compensation is strong.

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's purpose with the verb 'Run' and resource 'generic vSZ query', and lists supported query types (ap, client, wlan, dpsk, roguesInfoList). It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like vsz_query_aps or vsz_query_clients, but the word 'generic' implies broader scope, which is a partial distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this generic tool versus the many specialized sibling tools (e.g., vsz_list_aps, vsz_query_clients). The description lists supported query types but does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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