vast_list_archived_zones

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists archived zones but does not disclose pagination behavior, default/max limit, or response format. The claim 'all' could mislead an agent into thinking it returns every archived zone in one call, despite the limit/offset parameters.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the action and resource. It contains zero filler or redundant content, earning a top score for conciseness.

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?

For a simple list operation, the description is minimally adequate: it states the purpose and the schema covers parameters. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description leaves gaps about pagination semantics and return value shape, making it only partially complete.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters: limit ('Max results to return (default 100, max 100)') and offset ('Pagination offset'). Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and the description adds no additional parameter context beyond what the schema already provides.

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 archived VAST zones' uses a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('archived VAST zones'), and the word 'all' signals unbounded scope. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like vast_list_zones (non-archived zones) and list_archived_zones (non-VAST zones).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vast_list_zones, vast_get_archived_zone, or vast_unarchive_zone. There are no explicit context cues or exclusions, so an agent gets no help in selecting among related zone tools.

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