vast42_list_placements

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List all VAST 4.2 placements' and does not mention pagination, return format, read-only nature, or any side effects. The presence of 'limit' and 'offset' in the schema hints at pagination, but the description adds no explicit behavioral context.

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, tightly worded sentence: 'List all VAST 4.2 placements.' It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero wasted words. This is an appropriately minimal description for a simple list operation.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not explain the return value structure or pagination behavior. It also fails to clarify what a 'VAST 4.2 placement' is or how it differs from other placement types. Given the low complexity and 100% schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate but leaves out important contextual details.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters (limit and offset) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, which places it at the baseline of 3.

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 states the exact action ('List') and resource ('all VAST 4.2 placements'), making the purpose unmistakable. It distinguishes from similar sibling tools like vast_list_placements by specifically calling out the 'VAST 4.2' version.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the many existing placement list tools (e.g., vast_list_placements, list_placements, draft_list_placements). The description lacks any context about use cases, alternatives, or exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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