list_subnets

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It describes a non-destructive listing operation and specifies return fields, but doesn't explicitly state it's read-only or mention any side effects. Adequate for a simple list tool.

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?

Two sentences: first gives purpose and return data, second gives usage context. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fully covers the tool's purpose, return data, and usage context. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 no parameter info needed. The description adds value by listing return fields (subnet names, ext IDs, VLAN IDs, etc.), which goes beyond the empty input schema.

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?

Description clearly states it inventories subnets and lists the returned fields (names, ext IDs, VLAN IDs, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_clusters and list_vms by being subnet-specific.

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?

Explicitly mentions two use cases: picking a network for VM placement and checking available network segments. While it doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, the context is sufficient for an agent to decide when to call this tool.

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