panorama_get_template_stacks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's READ-ONLY marker is redundant. The description adds a minor detail about the config path but does not mention pagination, sorting, or authentication requirements, which would be useful for a read-only retrieval.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the key information: what it does and where it reads config. It avoids unnecessary fluff, though the READ-ONLY marker is redundant with annotations, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 simple with one optional parameter, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, the description does not explain the output format, which may be critical for an agent deciding how to parse the result, and lacks guidance on when to use this vs. similar sibling tools.

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 description covers 100% of parameters, and the schema notes that the 'firewall' parameter is required when multiple firewalls are configured. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but with full schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the context about what is being retrieved (template stacks) indirectly clarifies the parameter scope, warranting a 4.

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 verb 'Retrieves' and the specific resource 'all template stacks configured in Panorama', distinguishing it from siblings like panorama_get_templates and panorama_get_device_groups, which target different config elements. The READ-ONLY marker reinforces the purpose.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like panorama_get_templates or panorama_get_device_groups. However, the context of 'template stacks' vs 'templates' and 'device groups' is implied, and the sibling list helps an agent infer the distinction.

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