list_networks

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

The description says it lists across all accounts, which adds context beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description does not mention pagination, rate limits, or response format, which would be useful.

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 that is concise and directly states the tool's action and scope. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with comprehensive annotations, the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention that the output is a list, but the name implies that. Missing output schema is not a problem here.

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 input schema has no parameters, so no param details are needed. Schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously), and the description doesn't add parameter meaning because there are none. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool lists all networks (VPCs) across all Spinnaker accounts, which is specific and distinguishes it from siblings that list other resources like accounts, applications, or clusters.

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, but its purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer when network listing is needed. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, but given the naming convention among siblings, it is clear this is the canonical network listing tool.

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