vast_list_zones

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only states that it lists all zones. It does not mention pagination characteristics, default/max limits, whether archived zones are included, or any side effects. The word 'all' is ambiguous given 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 with no redundant words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it is too sparse to provide complete context.

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?

This is a simple list tool, but the description is incomplete. With no output schema, it does not explain the return format, whether archived zones are included, or how pagination should be handled to obtain the full list. Sibling tools suggest a taxonomy that is not addressed.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters (limit and offset) with clear explanations. The description adds little beyond the schema, merely implying a full list without elaborating on how pagination interacts with 'all'.

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 zones' has a clear verb (list) and resource (VAST zones), and the word 'all' conveys scope. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'list_zones' or 'list_all_zones', which likely overlap in purpose.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or relationships to related tools like 'vast_list_archived_zones' or 'list_all_zones'.

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