list_firewall_macros

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

No annotations, but the description accurately reflects a read-only list operation. It does not mention any side effects or special behaviors, which is acceptable given the tool's simplicity. There is no contradiction.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence that front-loads the key action and provides examples, with 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?

Given no parameters and an output schema, the description is sufficient for most use cases. It could add more detail about the output content, but the examples (SSH, HTTP) help ground the user's expectation.

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?

No parameters exist, so the description need not add semantics. Baseline 4 is appropriate as the schema fully covers the parameter space.

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?

Clearly states it lists firewall macros, which are predefined rule sets like SSH, HTTP. Distinct from sibling list tools (e.g., list_firewall_aliases, list_firewall_groups) by specifying 'predefined rule sets'.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other list tools. While the purpose is clear, the description lacks comparisons or exclusion criteria for siblings, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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