list_virtual_services

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

No annotations provided, so the description must bear full burden. It only states 'List', implying a read operation, but does not disclose potential side effects, permission requirements, pagination, or default scope (e.g., all namespaces). The returned fields are mentioned, but deeper behavioral context is missing.

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, well-structured sentence of 14 words that front-loads the verb and resource, with no wasted words. Efficient and to the point.

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 tool with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the primary purpose and result fields. Missing are details on parameter effects and behavioral caveats, but overall adequate for straightforward usage.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters (cluster, namespace). It adds no meaning beyond the schema field names, leaving the agent to infer how to filter results.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'Istio VirtualServices', and specifies the returned fields (hosts, gateways, HTTP/TCP route counts, age), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_services and other Istio resources.

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 explicit guidance on when to use or alternatives. The resource name is self-explanatory, but the description does not mention filtering behavior or prerequisites, leaving usage implied rather than stated.

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