vsz_query_clients

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. However, it only lists parameters and the word 'Query', without disclosing whether it is read-only, returns a specific structure, pagination behavior, or any limitations. As a query tool, it likely has no side effects, but this is not stated, and no additional behavioral context is given.

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 tight docstring with a clear purpose statement and a compact arg list. Every sentence adds value, no fluff, and the most important information is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

With a moderate parameter count, no nested objects, and an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. However, given the absence of annotations, the description lacks guidance on edge cases, response handling, or usage nuances. It is minimally viable but not fully complete for a tool with no annotations.

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 compensate. It provides a one-line explanation for each parameter (host: controller address, filters: JSON string of filter criteria, full_text_search: free-text search). This adds basic meaning beyond the schema, but does not detail the filter criteria format or supported fields, leaving the semantics incomplete.

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 states 'Query wireless clients with advanced filters' which clearly identifies the verb (query), resource (wireless clients), and differentiates it from simpler listing tools like vsz_list_clients. This explicitly distinguishes it from siblings by mentioning 'advanced filters'.

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 phrase 'advanced filters' implies the tool is for more complex queries, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives like vsz_list_clients or vsz_get_client. No exclusions or specific scenarios are given, only an implied context of needing filtering.

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