List ASA Config Servers

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

The description adds a behavioral note about not exposing passwords, which is useful for safety. However, since there are no annotations, the description should also disclose other behaviors like read-only nature, authentication requirements, or whether it lists all servers or a subset. This is a minimal addition beyond the tool name.

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 direct. It contains no unnecessary words and effectively communicates the core function.

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 that the tool has no output schema, the description should explain what information is returned (e.g., server names, IPs). It only states 'list servers' without specifying the output format or fields. This lack of detail makes it incomplete for an AI agent.

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, and description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter information, but none is needed. It could mention that no parameters are required, but that is not necessary.

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 (list), the resource (servers from config.json), and an important constraint (without exposing passwords). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'asa_list_servers', which could cause confusion about which tool to use for listing servers.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'asa_list_servers' or other config-related tools. The description lacks context about prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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