phpipam.subnets.list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the basic action but does not describe return format, pagination, ordering, whether child subnets are included, or any permissions or side effects. This is minimal transparency.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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 is simple, with one parameter and no output schema. The description adequately conveys the primary purpose but lacks details on return structure or behavior. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally viable but leaves room for interpretation about the exact output.

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 already provides the parameter 'sectionId' with a simple description 'Section ID'. The tool description adds context by clarifying that the section is the scope for listing subnets, but it does not elaborate on the expected value format or any special cases. Given the 100% schema coverage, this is sufficient but not enhanced.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a resource 'subnets' and a clear scope 'in a section'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like subnets.get (which retrieves a specific subnet) and sections.list (which lists sections).

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 implies usage: to list all subnets within a particular section. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, nor does it mention any limitations or exclusions. There is no direct comparison to sibling tools like subnets.get or addresses.list.

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