vast42_list_mezzanines

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'List all', which implies read-only, but it doesn't mention pagination behavior, default/max limits, ordering, or any other side effects or constraints. The schema hints at limit/offset, but the description doesn't explain how these affect results or whether all items are returned in one call.

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 with no filler or redundant information. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation and every word earns its place. No structural issues.

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?

The tool has only two parameters and no output schema, so completeness burden is moderate. The description explains what the tool does, but misses important context: 'all' conflicts with pagination (limit defaults to 100, max 100), which may mislead an agent into thinking all items are returned in one call. No mention of what a mezzanine is in this VAST 4.2 context, though sibling tools provide some inference.

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 coverage is 100% (limit and offset both have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context, such as default values or interaction between limit and offset, but the schema already provides the core semantics. No credit beyond baseline is warranted.

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 'List all VAST 4.2 mezzanines' uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('VAST 4.2 mezzanines'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like vast42_get_mezzanine (single item) and vast42_create_mezzanine (creation), and from other vast42_list_* tools for different resources.

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 phrase 'List all' provides clear context for when to use this tool: when you need to enumerate mezzanines. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the scope is evident from the description and sibling names. No explicit when-not-to-use, but clarity is sufficient for a straightforward list operation.

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