list_networks

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 'list', which implies a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm non-destructive behavior, permissions, or output format. The lack of annotations is compensated somewhat by the clear verb.

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?

A single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No unnecessary words, and every element adds value.

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 description covers the resource type and what information is returned ('IP service configuration where available'). However, without an output schema, the return format is not fully described, but it is adequate for a simple list tool.

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 has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter semantics because there are none to describe. Schema description coverage is trivially 100%.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'logical networks', specifies the types (Premium/Quantum: Ethernet, Modbus Plus, Fipway), and mentions the included information (IP service configuration). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'add_network' or 'set_network_ip'.

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 verb 'list' implies a read operation, and sibling tools like 'add_network' and 'set_network_ip' serve as alternatives for modifications. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other list tools (e.g., 'list_variables') or when not to use it.

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