get_user_terminals_l2vpn

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds required permission context ('Device command and configuration, View'), which is useful. However, no disclosure of behavioral traits beyond that (e.g., error scenarios, rate limits). Bar lowered by annotations but still minimal extra value.

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?

Single line with action, permission, and endpoint. Extremely concise with no filler. Every part earns its place.

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?

Simple read-only tool with no parameters and no output schema. Description covers purpose and permission. Could mention return format or what 'L2VPN circuits' includes, but not essential. Adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 in input schema (0 params). Baseline 4 applies. Description does not need to add param info, and it correctly omits any.

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 'Get L2VPN circuits' with specific verb and resource, and 'available for this account' denotes scope. Distinguishes from siblings like put_user_terminals_by_device_id_l2vpn (update) and get_user_terminals (general terminals).

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Mentions required permission but does not compare with alternative tools (e.g., get_user_terminals for non-L2VPN circuits). Usage is implied but not contrasted with siblings.

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