vsz_query_aps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral caveat: DOMAIN-type filters may return 403 depending on privileges, and recommends full_text_search. However, it doesn't mention whether the tool is read-only, pagination, or any side effects beyond the API call. This is helpful but not comprehensive.

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 clear purpose, a note, and an Args list. The first two sentences are slightly redundant ('Query access points with filters' and 'Uses the vSZ query API to search APs by criteria'), but the overall length is appropriate and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema, return values need no explanation. The description covers purpose, parameters, and a significant API caveat, making it functionally complete. It could improve with explicit alternative tool references, but the core usage context is present.

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%, so the description must document parameters, and it does thoroughly. It explains host (IP/hostname), filters (JSON string with example), and full_text_search (free-text, recommended). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema titles.

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 opens with 'Query access points with filters', providing a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies it uses the vSZ query API to search APs by criteria, making its role distinct from simpler listing tools like vsz_list_aps.

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 guidance is implied: 'Query access points with filters' suggests it's for filtered search, and the note recommending full_text_search over DOMAIN-type filters provides practical direction. However, it doesn't explicitly compare against siblings like vsz_list_aps or vsz_query, nor state when not to use it.

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