appliance-list-l3

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'read-only', which is important, but fails to disclose other traits such as pagination behavior, required permissions, or that the tool returns lists. This is insufficient for a 6-parameter tool with pagination tokens.

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 with a parenthetical note, which is very concise. However, it could be structured better to include usage context. No fluff, but the brevity sacrifices completeness.

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 6 parameters including pagination tokens and a filter, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain that results are paginated, how to handle pagination, or what the output looks like (no output schema). The description is too minimal for the tool's complexity.

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?

All 6 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already 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 the action 'List', the resource 'L3 interfaces', and the scope 'across networks for the organization'. The addition of '(read-only)' further clarifies its nature. It is distinct from sibling tools which cover different resources like ports, VLANs, etc.

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 provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over siblings or when not to use it. The usage context is implied by the resource name, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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