list_vms

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

With no annotations, the description fully conveys behavior: it is a read-only listing operation that returns specific VM attributes. No contradictions or hidden effects are implied, making the tool's behavior transparent.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence provides the action and return values, the second gives usage guidance. It is efficiently front-loaded and complete.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists the returned fields (names, ext IDs, power state, host, etc.), which is sufficient for a simple list tool. It covers purpose, usage, and output without gaps.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline score for 0 parameters is 4, and no further information is required.

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 'List all VMs visible to the Prism Central deployment', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_vm' by listing all VMs and specifying the returned fields (names, ext IDs, power state, etc.).

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 explicitly says 'Use this when an agent needs to discover what VMs exist... check VM inventory, or find a specific VM by name to inspect further', providing clear usage context. It implies the alternative 'get_vm' for deeper inspection, fulfilling the when-to-use and alternatives criteria.

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