vmware_list_networks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it describes the output structure in JSON (fields like name, moid, type, accessible, vms, vlan) and notes that 'vlan' is only filled for distributed portgroups. It also explains the difference between JSON and markdown output formats. This goes beyond annotations.

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 extremely concise—two sentences plus a brief sample structure—while conveying the core purpose and key behavioral details. Every sentence earns its place; no wasted 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 the output schema exists, the description need not detail return values, but it does provide a helpful output skeleton. It covers the main purpose, output format options, and a conditional field (vlan). Minor gap: it does not mention pagination behavior, but the schema covers limit/offset. Overall complete for a list tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (all three parameters are documented in the schema). The description does not add any additional meaning or context for the parameters beyond what the schema provides. 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 clearly states the tool lists networks, specifically standard and distributed portgroups. It uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('networks'), and distinguishes itself from sibling list tools like vmware_list_hosts or vmware_list_vms by being network-focused.

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 implies usage (you use it to get network listings) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any conditions or exclusions. No sibling comparisons are offered.

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